From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
llvm@lists.linux.dev, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun@kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] arm64, compiler-context-analysis: Permit alias analysis through __READ_ONCE() with CONFIG_LTO=y
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2026 14:14:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260204131400.GI2995752@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANpmjNNzx-zc_-ZPgwe5DoWLmexw5irT2n+XMUqxTrfwxTxTmg@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Feb 04, 2026 at 11:46:02AM +0100, Marco Elver wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Feb 2026 at 12:47, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> wrote:
> [...]
> > > > What does GCC do with this? :/
> > >
> > > GCC currently doesn't see it, LTO is clang only.
> >
> > LTO is just one way that a compiler could end up breaking dependency
> > chains, so I really want to maintain the option to enable this path for
> > GCC in case we run into problems caused by other optimisations in future.
>
> It will work for GCC, but only from GCC 11. Before that __auto_type
> does not drop qualifiers:
> https://godbolt.org/z/sc5bcnzKd (switch to GCC 11 to see it compile)
>
> So to summarize, all supported Clang versions deal with __auto_type
> correctly for the fallback; GCC from version 11 does (kernel currently
> supports GCC 8 and above). From GCC 14 and Clang 19 we have
> __typeof_unqual__.
>
> I really don't see another way forward; there's no other good way to
> solve this issue. I would advise against pessimizing new compilers and
> features because maybe one day we might still want to enable this
> version of READ_ONCE() for GCC 8-10.
>
> Should we one day choose to enable this READ_ONCE() version for GCC,
> we will (a) either have bumped the minimum GCC version to 11+, or (b)
> we can only do so from GCC 11. At this point GCC 11 was released 5
> years ago!
There is, from this thread:
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20260111182010.GH3634291@ZenIV
another trick to strip qualifiers:
#define unqual_non_array(T) __typeof__(((T(*)(void))0)())
which will work from GCC-8.4 onwards. Arguably, it should be possible to
raise the minimum from 8 to 8.4 (IMO).
But yes; in general I think it is fine to have 'old' compilers generate
suboptimal code.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-04 13:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-30 13:28 [PATCH v3 0/3] arm64: Fixes for __READ_ONCE() with CONFIG_LTO=y Marco Elver
2026-01-30 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] arm64: Fix non-atomic " Marco Elver
2026-01-30 15:06 ` David Laight
2026-01-30 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] arm64: Optimize " Marco Elver
2026-01-30 15:11 ` David Laight
2026-02-02 15:36 ` Will Deacon
2026-02-02 16:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-02-02 16:05 ` Will Deacon
2026-02-02 17:48 ` Marco Elver
2026-02-02 19:28 ` David Laight
2026-01-30 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] arm64, compiler-context-analysis: Permit alias analysis through " Marco Elver
2026-01-30 15:13 ` David Laight
2026-02-02 15:39 ` Will Deacon
2026-02-02 19:29 ` David Laight
2026-02-03 11:47 ` Will Deacon
2026-02-04 10:46 ` Marco Elver
2026-02-04 13:14 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2026-02-04 14:15 ` Will Deacon
2026-02-06 15:09 ` Marco Elver
2026-02-06 18:26 ` David Laight
2026-02-15 21:55 ` Marco Elver
2026-02-15 22:16 ` David Laight
2026-02-15 22:43 ` Marco Elver
2026-02-15 23:18 ` David Laight
2026-02-15 23:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2026-02-16 11:09 ` David Laight
2026-02-16 15:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2026-02-16 17:43 ` David Laight
2026-02-17 12:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-02-17 14:25 ` David Laight
2026-02-17 16:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2026-02-17 16:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2026-02-18 19:34 ` Boqun Feng
2026-02-18 20:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2026-02-19 15:21 ` Gary Guo
2026-02-19 18:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2026-02-02 19:13 ` [PATCH v3 0/3] arm64: Fixes for " Will Deacon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260204131400.GI2995752@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=boqun@kernel.org \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=elver@google.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox