Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Tue, 2 Jun 2020 16:36:33 +0200 | Subject | [PATCH] kcsan: Prefer '__no_kcsan inline' in test | From | Marco Elver <> |
| |
Instead of __no_kcsan_or_inline, prefer '__no_kcsan inline' in test -- this is in case we decide to remove __no_kcsan_or_inline.
Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com> ---
Hi Paul,
This is to prepare eventual removal of __no_kcsan_or_inline, and avoid a series that doesn't apply to anything other than -next (because some bits are in -tip and the test only in -rcu; although this problem might be solved in 2 weeks). This patch is to make sure in case the __kcsan_or_inline series is based on -tip, integration in -next doesn't cause problems.
This came up in https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200529185923.GO706495@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net
Thanks, -- Marco
--- kernel/kcsan/kcsan-test.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/kcsan/kcsan-test.c b/kernel/kcsan/kcsan-test.c index a8c11506dd2a..3af420ad6ee7 100644 --- a/kernel/kcsan/kcsan-test.c +++ b/kernel/kcsan/kcsan-test.c @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ static struct { }; /* Setup test checking loop. */ -static __no_kcsan_or_inline void +static __no_kcsan inline void begin_test_checks(void (*func1)(void), void (*func2)(void)) { kcsan_disable_current(); @@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ begin_test_checks(void (*func1)(void), void (*func2)(void)) } /* End test checking loop. */ -static __no_kcsan_or_inline bool +static __no_kcsan inline bool end_test_checks(bool stop) { if (!stop && time_before(jiffies, end_time)) { -- 2.27.0.rc2.251.g90737beb825-goog
| |