From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Josh Poimboeuf Subject: Re: [RFC 0/8] Improving compiler inlining decisions Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 22:48:02 -0500 Message-ID: <20180516034802.nuf7ft65nvtgc65j@treble> References: <20180515141124.84254-1-namit@vmware.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180515141124.84254-1-namit@vmware.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Nadav Amit Cc: Juergen Gross , x86@kernel.org, Kees Cook , Jonathan Corbet , Peter Zijlstra , Christopher Li , Randy Dunlap , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , Jan Beulich , "H. Peter Anvin" , Alok Kataria , nadav.amit@gmail.com, Thomas Gleixner List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 07:11:07AM -0700, Nadav Amit wrote: > This patch-set deals with an interesting yet stupid problem: code that > does not get inlined despite its simplicity. I got the 0/8 patch twice, and didn't get the 1/8 patch. Was there an issue with the sending of the patches? -- Josh