From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00BCBC433E0 for ; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 12:19:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A227964F10 for ; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 12:19:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231818AbhBYMTW (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Feb 2021 07:19:22 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:37574 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229566AbhBYMTT (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Feb 2021 07:19:19 -0500 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3DE3164F19 for ; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 12:18:38 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1614255518; bh=ye7gY2SoV8buO1J6kbzjZyFZ7oX5EX1wscCeEz3vz5U=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:From; b=XRVTGE5IopMR+I4hFFusN9YVlRMlpwUNdeeih2pOj0rbHsF4KY3ElLD6OQbArEpDj 6bhj97v/kEh/hJlxJbOGtsakI8Ska9UL+uGlZjGZ1tA/sRKQ4GS4/Xud9HbRmedhBI SIyHxa7qKLV9mWa67Ltnr8d3Ils+gNnCKVN7trbcUtcINWcSmi2AOAJiXqR+ZTdztO Xkv6Je5VntgMs7Vexb4/XqcjOgP4ES7q/aKkzrsF2QqLqVN6uA73tzmVfh/Bubn4zK frrZMyacgPghMoEOdVv3QjlUEWOUZBrSy2U7mjUHWDbVP7zm0VwzMEyFSROwXKHR8Q DIQYZ9x2JCTgA== Received: by mail-oi1-f178.google.com with SMTP id h17so5871593oih.5 for ; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 04:18:38 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533qerTjpslSZjMqmHhmy/dHeY2lPeG/puh6exT8vgog+i/LN11e pfNmnMzzOACr+qDzUqovesxp78G9bZT4gkX6zjI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwr1Q0cBDNGVta5trclkTx0pQGHYyPn8k7aHyBkDrUgJWMnXPUmUNEQOGDgam4vepnIlefwfd8bxDNfJ1GQeLQ= X-Received: by 2002:aca:4a47:: with SMTP id x68mr1574795oia.67.1614255517403; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 04:18:37 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210225112247.2240389-1-arnd@kernel.org> <20210225114533.GA380@zn.tnic> In-Reply-To: <20210225114533.GA380@zn.tnic> From: Arnd Bergmann Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2021 13:18:21 +0100 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: mark some mpspec inline functions as __init To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "the arch/x86 maintainers" , Nathan Chancellor , Nick Desaulniers , Arnd Bergmann , "H. Peter Anvin" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , clang-built-linux Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 12:45 PM Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 12:22:41PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > -static inline void get_smp_config(void) > > +static inline __init void get_smp_config(void) > > __always_inline then I guess. > > Not inlining those is just silly. Either way works correctly, I don't care much, but picked the __init annotation as it seemed more intuitive. If the compiler decides to make it out-of-line for whatever reason, I see no point in telling it otherwise, even though I agree it is a bit silly. Should I send the patch with __always_inline? Arnd