From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mutex: make mutex_lock_nested an inline function
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 22:38:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151013203812.GM17308@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <11282238.AHmyWliPRj@wuerfel>
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 10:30:08PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> The second argument of the mutex_lock_nested() helper is only
> evaluated if CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC is set. Otherwise we
> get this build warning for the new regulator_lock_supply
> function:
>
> drivers/regulator/core.c: In function 'regulator_lock_supply':
> drivers/regulator/core.c:142:6: warning: unused variable 'i' [-Wunused-variable]
>
> To avoid the warning, this patch changes the definition of
> mutex_lock_nested() to be static inline function rather than
> a macro, which tells gcc that the variable is potentially
> used.
> -# define mutex_lock_nested(lock, subclass) mutex_lock(lock)
> +static inline void mutex_lock_nested(struct mutex *lock, unsigned int subclass)
> +{
> + return mutex_lock(lock);
> +}
Can you verify that this results in an identical kernel?
Having this a proper argument results in the compiler having to actually
evaluate the expression resulting in @subclass, this might have side
effects and generate code.
A quick grep shows a large amount of trivial code that optimizers will
still happily throw away, but it should be verified that this does not
result in pointless code generation.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-13 20:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-13 20:30 Arnd Bergmann
2015-10-13 20:38 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2015-10-13 21:46 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-10-14 8:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-14 8:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-14 9:00 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-10-14 9:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-14 9:59 ` Mark Brown
2015-10-14 10:27 ` Mark Brown
2015-10-14 11:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-14 12:36 ` Mark Brown
2015-10-14 13:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-14 13:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-14 13:58 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-10-14 14:11 ` Mark Brown
2015-10-22 15:02 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-10-22 15:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-22 17:44 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-10-27 18:13 ` Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20151013203812.GM17308@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome