From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: peterz@infradead.org (Peter Zijlstra) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:08:15 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] mutex: make mutex_lock_nested an inline function In-Reply-To: <11240940.NHO2vFoJOz@wuerfel> References: <11282238.AHmyWliPRj@wuerfel> <20151014082050.GQ17308@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20151014083707.GR11639@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <11240940.NHO2vFoJOz@wuerfel> Message-ID: <20151014090815.GS17308@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:00:20AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday 14 October 2015 10:37:07 Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > Uuh, I just looked at next and saw this regulator_lock_supply() > > > function. How is that limited? subclass must be <8 otherwise bad things > > > happen. > > > > Also, the function appears unused, just delete it > > That was my first suggestion as well when I ran into > > drivers/regulator/core.c:139:13: warning: 'regulator_lock_supply' defined but not used > > but apparently this is work-in-progress and the plan is to use it > in 4.4 when the rest of the currently-under-review patches are merged. And here I thought we had a fairly strong rule that we should not merge unused code :/ In any case, whomever wrote that function had better first explain why its not broken. And I'm not too keen on making mutex_lock_nested() an inline due it being too easy to generate code with it. I'd much rather work around the occasional warning than have to deal with silent but unintended code spills. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753009AbbJNJIZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:08:25 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:35268 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751914AbbJNJIW (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:08:22 -0400 Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:08:15 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Liam Girdwood , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mark Brown , akpm@linux-foundation.org, Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH] mutex: make mutex_lock_nested an inline function Message-ID: <20151014090815.GS17308@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <11282238.AHmyWliPRj@wuerfel> <20151014082050.GQ17308@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20151014083707.GR11639@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <11240940.NHO2vFoJOz@wuerfel> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <11240940.NHO2vFoJOz@wuerfel> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:00:20AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday 14 October 2015 10:37:07 Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > Uuh, I just looked at next and saw this regulator_lock_supply() > > > function. How is that limited? subclass must be <8 otherwise bad things > > > happen. > > > > Also, the function appears unused, just delete it > > That was my first suggestion as well when I ran into > > drivers/regulator/core.c:139:13: warning: 'regulator_lock_supply' defined but not used > > but apparently this is work-in-progress and the plan is to use it > in 4.4 when the rest of the currently-under-review patches are merged. And here I thought we had a fairly strong rule that we should not merge unused code :/ In any case, whomever wrote that function had better first explain why its not broken. And I'm not too keen on making mutex_lock_nested() an inline due it being too easy to generate code with it. I'd much rather work around the occasional warning than have to deal with silent but unintended code spills.