On Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 09:08:47AM -0800, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > From a build system perspective, I'd rather just point users towards > LTO if they have this concern. We support full and thin lto. This > proposal would add a third variant for just rust drivers. Each > variation on LTO has a maintenance cost and each have had their own > distinct fun bugs in the past. Not sure an additional variant is > worth the maintenance cost, even if it's technically feasible. If we're allowed to talk about ideal solutions ... I hate putting code in header files. I'd rather be able to put, eg: __force_inline int put_page_testzero(struct page *page) { VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(page_ref_count(page) == 0, page); return page_ref_dec_and_test(page); } __force_inline int folio_put_testzero(struct folio *folio) { return put_page_testzero(&folio->page); } __force_inline void folio_put(struct folio *folio) { if (folio_put_testzero(folio)) __folio_put(folio); } into a .c file and have both C and Rust inline folio_put(), folio_put_testzero(), put_page_testzero(), VM_BUG_ON_PAGE() and page_ref_dec_and_test(), but not even attempt to inline __folio_put() (because We Know Better, and have determined that is the point at which to stop).