Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the block tree

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 4/12/23 10:56?AM, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 10:44:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 4/12/23 10:35?AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On 4/12/23 10:25?AM, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 01:44:00PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 05:14:00PM -0700, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Peter, what do you think, should we make track uaccess state across
>>>>>> function boundaries?
>>>>>
>>>>> So IIRC the goal was to explicitly dis-allow that. You want minimal code
>>>>> executed with STAC and hence disallow calling stuff.
>>>>
>>>> I guess I was wondering if we could make an exception for calls to
>>>> static IPA-optimized functions, so we wouldn't have to scramble to "fix"
>>>> compiler optimizations.
>>>>
>>>> But for now, yeah let's just keep it simple.
>>>>
>>>> Jens, can you confirm this works?  I added __noclone instead of removing
>>>> static.
>>>
>>> Yep, works for me.
>>
>> Want me to slap that patch on top of the branch that has the commit
>> that causes it?
> 
> Yes, please.  Thanks!

Done!

-- 
Jens Axboe




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux USB Development]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux