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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham 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 8DB71C32789 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 17:21:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BFDB20862 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 17:21:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="bT3LbXPX" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4BFDB20862 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2389627AbeKGCr7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Nov 2018 21:47:59 -0500 Received: from mail-lf1-f65.google.com ([209.85.167.65]:35225 "EHLO mail-lf1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2388987AbeKGCr7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Nov 2018 21:47:59 -0500 Received: by mail-lf1-f65.google.com with SMTP id d7-v6so9460531lfi.2 for ; Tue, 06 Nov 2018 09:21:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=KL/TXHJ9tRTBtZbAo4en4y4moLqNmxu8glUjmxpXqZM=; b=bT3LbXPXTwX3DIpaUEYAtfi8NohysF7yNnfX+4lBxlWx9in1zKJGwL5MLLovgwLiIx GnHsTw6IhAnJkzJCaiifQDuhiekEXZIIFQ59Jgok4lXzYH8pPlZ0XxaxG5IR1vSgaDZ6 2zL9ISMTVjdhE2G965THJiO+JWvveagBKk6Z3sIu6xg0wQt+JoPtds+f+j/auG691J/U K94CuWoo/x8x+FhMnNpVNavkozDFOtxQbFExy10M0b3WQphJ6Lht1IBSsr5kFQbVN1tQ lDt024hhJGfjgd013jZuK6kot5qToGGwArBAKWv2PE+25PegM4B/0vA/oBpttBGw9fK4 AcFA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=KL/TXHJ9tRTBtZbAo4en4y4moLqNmxu8glUjmxpXqZM=; b=h+fwa2fyuCLooilltgKXmalLPPWVi/6nyoBCOcta9SmJwed/5NMWr221ZyqfMETX/X 0AKOVm4nxD5ZQEjrdTjDOkx41BWq5kEOO2/dadzmNOd9NfMR1NHaD7698tZjkXChyQJG v6/9c2KRB0QRz5O4KyTJJvqalxw7bBzhdvQM/4mw51DcCeTfzo/z3p8hQU7IB2+OcDvi gRnuUez456H7mPm5TAM46FG4P3t6FaOcBwMuLOD//7TcH+/JM+A7EOziDv3YHR+wbrM0 WPfnFVbC2w8nrCrVVemeUW9XzXlko7RFJSOmCNvAZ/RSOqWXTy3XiaGhQPPBLjhxnX+k w9ew== X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gLn9/mVgcKZNV7g1dOBBv3vAKbNPiug1qor5BusmJa5Yrh7miJx hhiQiffK3yGVmKPCloZwOAqGcspKQEU8XsaJLKo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5fj3RcYExIsDjvDBRpDQHAr1D8Y9OUmjyhxkfAIvPyUO8HWYVyedHRd9LUc6fTjyp9HohmAhrVSSsDOHyQssMA= X-Received: by 2002:a19:8fce:: with SMTP id s75mr15335314lfk.151.1541524904698; Tue, 06 Nov 2018 09:21:44 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20181106100229.GI22431@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20181106144619.GB9781@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> In-Reply-To: <20181106144619.GB9781@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> From: Miguel Ojeda Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 18:21:33 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] tree-wide: Remove __inline__ and __inline usage To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel , Borislav Petkov , namit@vmware.com, Joe Perches , segher@kernel.crashing.org, Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 3:46 PM Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > If you actually read what I wrote: You got me, I did read very quickly :) > Dunno, but that is a far more difficult patch. The proposed one is an > obvious identify. I would say they are orthogonal, even if both would solve the problem. I also wondered why we have the funny __inline[__] stuff around while doing the compiler attributes series, so I thought bringing it up. Cheers, Miguel