From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 789412912 for ; Tue, 9 Jan 2024 06:19:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arndb.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arndb.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=arndb.de header.i=@arndb.de header.b="YamSfekn"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="isZB8Vf2" Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69F935C02D8; Tue, 9 Jan 2024 01:19:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from imap51 ([10.202.2.101]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 09 Jan 2024 01:19:07 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=arndb.de; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1704781147; x=1704867547; bh=i2E0GYQGCU nukc1Xm2CUnNLh1yKk7Vr1Uo5Z8zGq0O8=; b=YamSfeknz2EVajGJWpKi/+fSQc S/xhY4fkku5oq/4N1cyPBjKoGPARMcjxDp8th9UGD0z8sKNyJ1YfJ6DM17z7sxSL HO1KFt1EZ3d/hE70mHOG706fhP76ugYn/G25BI3UvG1xOiGcavEOFwy4y2LbGZpE VvDox5Lat8XlZRFVAofWsrwyOxRmY43evhG8pnMLN00230JpwvICRKe86trf/DEh ujcAJ/CR0aW89rqJM1nU2cSwUbJrDw63mLNqmmBwlRruItEXQ5ZtowNJwP/0bGME 3c0iQsWOl6IJj9f5bEmNsbwI8NtGrMW2nDhp9lSp1inLoDERBW64TtqmSF6Q== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm2; t=1704781147; x=1704867547; bh=i2E0GYQGCUnukc1Xm2CUnNLh1yKk 7Vr1Uo5Z8zGq0O8=; b=isZB8Vf21ChqCRootrre9JTBLbgE9pMGz3oek4oNAfmH MbVwn1XjRN3+n9Jio3r/Ii5RwAz7/6Ykb5y1ymSGw6Bp+GCVdJIv+TlmOmlNJK9/ k36xh7zs31oKjQkbwY7jOMyIZIolc5EUZzOBOhzMqy+fpAydJOcd2ovRdX9vmYO2 +lq9+OVruUPPeU60319cMeLj3YEn1TmsLZypmv4uCuQ197t62kEI6eDOJL22jnNQ Xtq4eA8oGoy3aDbs2HhFgE6Q+PELya6eHOG+Jw1AADPWbab34uODEiAFmHQZEwGy saVQG68oz5nFloV4mG/3QEFWJINlUF0fM4YMOC6AiA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvkedrvdehkedgleegucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvfevufgtsehttdertderredtnecuhfhrohhmpedftehr nhguuceuvghrghhmrghnnhdfuceorghrnhgusegrrhhnuggsrdguvgeqnecuggftrfgrth htvghrnhepvefhffeltdegheeffffhtdegvdehjedtgfekueevgfduffettedtkeekueef hedunecuffhomhgrihhnpehkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrghenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpe dtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpegrrhhnugesrghrnhgusgdruggv X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i56a14606:Fastmail Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 84DE8B6008D; Tue, 9 Jan 2024 01:19:06 -0500 (EST) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.9.0-alpha0-1364-ga51d5fd3b7-fm-20231219.001-ga51d5fd3 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <2f2e8df4-d8bb-4eff-8e70-0ac38736bd74@app.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20240108174330.472996-2-leobras@redhat.com> References: <20240108174330.472996-2-leobras@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2024 07:18:46 +0100 From: "Arnd Bergmann" To: "Leonardo Bras" , "Catalin Marinas" , "Will Deacon" , "Eric W. Biederman" , "Kees Cook" , "Oleg Nesterov" , "Mark Brown" , "Mark Rutland" , "Steven Rostedt" , "Guo Hui" Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] arm64: remove unnecessary ifdefs around is_compat_task() Content-Type: text/plain On Mon, Jan 8, 2024, at 18:43, Leonardo Bras wrote: > Currently some parts of the codebase will test for CONFIG_COMPAT before > testing is_compat_task(). > > is_compat_task() is a inlined function only present on CONFIG_COMPAT. > On the other hand, for !CONFIG_COMPAT, we have in linux/compat.h: > > #define is_compat_task() (0) > > Since we have this define available in every usage of is_compat_task() for > !CONFIG_COMPAT, it's unnecessary to keep the ifdefs, since the compiler is > smart enough to optimize-out those snippets on CONFIG_COMPAT=n > > This requires some regset code as well as a few other defines to be made > available on !CONFIG_COMPAT, so some symbols can get resolved before > getting optimized-out. > > Signed-off-by: Leonardo Bras > --- > Changes since v1: > - Move some regset code and other defines outside of CONFIG_COMPAT > - Closes: > https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202401061219.Y2LD7LTx-lkp@intel.com/ > Link: > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240105041458.126602-3-leobras@redhat.com/ Looks good to me, and did not cause any regressions in an overnight randconfig build loop. Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann