From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753999AbYDRWfi (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Apr 2008 18:35:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751591AbYDRWfa (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Apr 2008 18:35:30 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:37457 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751370AbYDRWfa (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Apr 2008 18:35:30 -0400 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 15:34:55 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Introduce down_killable() Message-Id: <20080418153455.4d0bee30.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <200804181705.m3IH56W4007130@hera.kernel.org> References: <200804181705.m3IH56W4007130@hera.kernel.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.20; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 17:05:06 GMT Linux Kernel Mailing List wrote: > --- a/kernel/semaphore.c > +++ b/kernel/semaphore.c > @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ > > static noinline void __down(struct semaphore *sem); > static noinline int __down_interruptible(struct semaphore *sem); > +static noinline int __down_killable(struct semaphore *sem); > static noinline void __up(struct semaphore *sem); What is the reason for all the noinlines in this file? Something to do with getting proper wchan output? I guess it doesn't hurt from a documentation POV, but did you find that it was actually necessary? IOW: is gcc now capable of secretly inlining functions which are defined further ahead in the compilation unit? (did you actually "test" the wchan stuff, btw?)