On 6/15/2020 10:00 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 09:34:58AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote: > >> OK, so this has been dropped for spi/for-next right? How do we move from >> there? > > Well, I actually have it queued up for applying so unless I pull it > before my scripts get that far through the stuff I queued over the merge > window it'll go in (I dropped it due to it not being a bugfix). If it > were me I'd go with the two instruction hit from checking the flag TBH > but otherwise I guess __always_inline should work for compilers that > misoptimize. None of this is getting in the way of the framework so if > everyone involved in the driver is happy to spend time optimising it > and dealing with the fragility then it's fine by me. OK, how about I send you an increment patch (would a fixup be okay?) that adds __always_inline since we know from this thread that some compilers may mis-optimize the function inlining? -- Florian
