[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251109115152.GD2545891@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2025 12:51:52 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Xie Yuanbin <qq570070308@...il.com>, david@...hat.com,
tglx@...utronix.de, segher@...nel.crashing.org, riel@...riel.com,
linux@...linux.org.uk, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
paulmck@...nel.org, pjw@...nel.org, palmer@...belt.com,
aou@...s.berkeley.edu, alex@...ti.fr, hca@...ux.ibm.com,
gor@...ux.ibm.com, agordeev@...ux.ibm.com,
borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com, svens@...ux.ibm.com, davem@...emloft.net,
andreas@...sler.com, luto@...nel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, acme@...nel.org,
namhyung@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, jolsa@...nel.org,
irogers@...gle.com, adrian.hunter@...el.com, james.clark@...aro.org,
anna-maria@...utronix.de, frederic@...nel.org,
juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com,
mgorman@...e.de, vschneid@...hat.com, nathan@...nel.org,
nick.desaulniers+lkml@...il.com, morbo@...gle.com,
justinstitt@...gle.com, thuth@...hat.com, brauner@...nel.org,
arnd@...db.de, jlayton@...nel.org, aalbersh@...hat.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, david@...nel.org,
lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, max.kellermann@...os.com,
ryan.roberts@....com, nysal@...ux.ibm.com, urezki@...il.com,
x86@...nel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, llvm@...ts.linux.dev,
will@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] Provide the always inline version of some
functions
On Sat, Nov 08, 2025 at 02:14:44PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> >+static struct rq *finish_task_switch(struct task_struct *prev)
> >+{
> >+ return finish_task_switch_ainline(prev);
> >+}
> >+
> > /**
> > * schedule_tail - first thing a freshly forked thread must call.
> > * @prev: the thread we just switched away from.
>
> There is, in fact: you have to have an always_inline version, and wrap it in a noinline version.
Yes, but all of this is particularly retarded, there are exactly _2_
callers of this function. Keeping an out-of-line copy for one while
inlineing the other makes 0 sense.
Also, the amount of crap he needs to mark __always_inline doesn't make
much sense to me, is he building with -Os or something?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists