Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | From | Alexander Lobakin <> | Subject | [PATCH] numa: mark __next_node() as __always_inline to fix section mismatch | Date | Mon, 6 Dec 2021 17:17:45 +0100 |
| |
Clang (13) uninlines __next_node() which emits the following warning due to that this function is used in init code (amd_numa_init(), sched_init_numa() etc.):
WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text+0x927ee): Section mismatch in reference from the function __next_node() to the variable .init.data:numa_nodes_parsed The function __next_node() references the variable __initdata numa_nodes_parsed. This is often because __next_node lacks a __initdata annotation or the annotation of numa_nodes_parsed is wrong.
Mark __next_node() as __always_inline() so it won't get uninlined. bloat-o-meter over x86_64 binaries says this:
scripts/bloat-o-meter -c vmlinux.baseline vmlinux add/remove: 1/1 grow/shrink: 2/7 up/down: 446/-2166 (-1720) Function old new delta apply_wqattrs_cleanup - 410 +410 amd_numa_init 814 842 +28 sched_init_numa 1338 1346 +8 find_next_bit 38 19 -19 __next_node 45 - -45 apply_wqattrs_prepare 1069 799 -270 wq_nice_store 688 414 -274 wq_numa_store 805 433 -372 wq_cpumask_store 789 402 -387 apply_workqueue_attrs 538 147 -391 workqueue_set_unbound_cpumask 947 539 -408 Total: Before=14422603, After=14420883, chg -0.01%
So it's both win-win in terms of resolving section mismatch and saving some text size (-1.7 Kb is quite nice).
Signed-off-by: Alexander Lobakin <alexandr.lobakin@intel.com> --- include/linux/nodemask.h | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/nodemask.h b/include/linux/nodemask.h index 567c3ddba2c4..55ba2c56f39b 100644 --- a/include/linux/nodemask.h +++ b/include/linux/nodemask.h @@ -266,7 +266,7 @@ static inline int __first_node(const nodemask_t *srcp) } #define next_node(n, src) __next_node((n), &(src)) -static inline int __next_node(int n, const nodemask_t *srcp) +static __always_inline int __next_node(int n, const nodemask_t *srcp) { return min_t(int,MAX_NUMNODES,find_next_bit(srcp->bits, MAX_NUMNODES, n+1)); } -- 2.33.1
| |