From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-yw0-f199.google.com (mail-yw0-f199.google.com [209.85.161.199]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A35D4440874 for ; Wed, 12 Jul 2017 20:29:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-yw0-f199.google.com with SMTP id m14so29138525ywd.5 for ; Wed, 12 Jul 2017 17:29:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yw0-x232.google.com (mail-yw0-x232.google.com. [2607:f8b0:4002:c05::232]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id i3si424938yba.94.2017.07.12.17.29.00 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 12 Jul 2017 17:29:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yw0-x232.google.com with SMTP id l21so16470033ywb.1 for ; Wed, 12 Jul 2017 17:29:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1499842660-10665-1-git-send-email-geert@linux-m68k.org> References: <1499842660-10665-1-git-send-email-geert@linux-m68k.org> From: Dan Williams Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2017 17:29:00 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Mark create_huge_pmd() inline to prevent build failure Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Andrew Morton , Arnd Bergmann , Linux MM , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 11:57 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > With gcc 4.1.2: > > mm/memory.o: In function `create_huge_pmd': > memory.c:(.text+0x93e): undefined reference to `do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page' > > Converting transparent_hugepage_enabled() from a macro to a static > inline function reduced the ability of the compiler to remove unused > code. > > Fix this by marking create_huge_pmd() inline. > > Fixes: 16981d763501c0e0 ("mm: improve readability of transparent_hugepage_enabled()") > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven > --- > Interestingly, create_huge_pmd() is emitted in the assembler output, but > never called. > --- > mm/memory.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c > index cbb57194687e393a..0e517be91a89e162 100644 > --- a/mm/memory.c > +++ b/mm/memory.c > @@ -3591,7 +3591,7 @@ static int do_numa_page(struct vm_fault *vmf) > return 0; > } > > -static int create_huge_pmd(struct vm_fault *vmf) > +static inline int create_huge_pmd(struct vm_fault *vmf) > { This seems fragile, what if the kernel decides to ignore the inline hint? If it must be inlined to avoid compile errors then it should be __always_inline, right? I also wonder if it's enough to just specify __always_inline to transparent_hugepage_enabled(), i.e. in case the compiler is making an uninlined copy of transparent_hugepage_enabled() in mm/memory.c. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org