On Tue, May 02, 2023 at 04:41:02PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Today, it is no longer a problem if an inlined function is not inlined and
> is traced. Removing notrace from inline has been requested several times
> over the years. I believe it is now safe to do so.
>
> Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> include/linux/compiler_types.h | 7 +++----
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/compiler_types.h b/include/linux/compiler_types.h
> index 547ea1ff806e..c8f23ba1c339 100644
> --- a/include/linux/compiler_types.h
> +++ b/include/linux/compiler_types.h
> @@ -182,9 +182,8 @@ struct ftrace_likely_data {
> * externally visible function. This makes extern inline behave as per gnu89
> * semantics rather than c99. This prevents multiple symbol definition errors
> * of extern inline functions at link time.
> - * A lot of inline functions can cause havoc with function tracing.
> */
> -#define inline inline __gnu_inline __inline_maybe_unused notrace
> +#define inline inline __gnu_inline __inline_maybe_unused
Yes!!! I've been wanting to do this for many years. This will help
live patching a lot.
Acked-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
Josh
