Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 14 Jan 2018 19:13:33 +0100 (CET) | From | Thomas Gleixner <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/6] locking/spinlocks: Mark spinlocks noinline when inline spinlocks are disabled |
| |
On Thu, 21 Dec 2017, Andi Kleen wrote:
> From: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> > > Otherwise LTO will inline them anyways and cause a large > kernel text increase. > > Since the explicit intention here is to not inline them marking > them noinline is good documentation even for the non LTO case. > > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> > --- > kernel/locking/spinlock.c | 56 +++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
How is that patch x86 specific?
Cc'in the maintainers of that is not optional either.
Thanks,
tglx
| |