[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wiS6nyWNjaTW_XL1ec3+-=tOszj+_sWGfPv9RG5WX5isQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2023 07:19:26 +0900
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@...il.com>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip 1/3] x86/percpu: Fix "const_pcpu_hot" version
generation failure
On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 at 07:12, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@...il.com> wrote:
>
> +/*
> + * The generic per-cpu infrastrucutre is not suitable for
> + * reading const-qualified variables.
> + */
> +#define this_cpu_read_const(pcp) ({ BUG(); (typeof(pcp))0; })
NAK. Absolutely not.
No way in hell is it acceptable to make this a run-time BUG. If it
doesn't work, it needs to be a compile failure. End of story.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists