On Sat, 23 Apr 2022 18:28:44 +0800
Patrick Wang <patrick.wang.shcn@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Patrick Wang <patrick.wang.shcn@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> v1->v2:
> - Modify log message.
>
> kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
> index c8ba0fe17267..971bb6a00ede 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
> @@ -460,7 +460,7 @@ static bool rcu_preempt_has_tasks(struct rcu_node *rnp)
> * be quite short, for example, in the case of the call from
> * rcu_read_unlock_special().
> */
> -static void
> +notrace static void
I'm fine with the change, but to be consistent with the rest of the kernel,
static needs to come before notrace.
Either:
static notrace void
or even (some places have):
static void notrace
but "static" should always be first.
-- Steve
> rcu_preempt_deferred_qs_irqrestore(struct task_struct *t, unsigned long flags)
> {
> bool empty_exp;
> @@ -581,7 +581,7 @@ rcu_preempt_deferred_qs_irqrestore(struct task_struct *t, unsigned long flags)
> * is disabled. This function cannot be expected to understand these
> * nuances, so the caller must handle them.
> */
> -static bool rcu_preempt_need_deferred_qs(struct task_struct *t)
> +notrace static bool rcu_preempt_need_deferred_qs(struct task_struct *t)
> {
> return (__this_cpu_read(rcu_data.cpu_no_qs.b.exp) ||
> READ_ONCE(t->rcu_read_unlock_special.s)) &&
> @@ -595,7 +595,7 @@ static bool rcu_preempt_need_deferred_qs(struct task_struct *t)
> * evaluate safety in terms of interrupt, softirq, and preemption
> * disabling.
> */
> -static void rcu_preempt_deferred_qs(struct task_struct *t)
> +notrace static void rcu_preempt_deferred_qs(struct task_struct *t)
> {
> unsigned long flags;
>
