From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/4] include/linux/compiler*.h: fix OPTIMIZER_HIDE_VAR Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2019 21:36:41 -0500 Message-ID: <20190109213543-mutt-send-email-mst__24947.1373077997$1547087689$gmane$org@kernel.org> References: <20190102205715.14054-1-mst@redhat.com> <20190102205715.14054-2-mst@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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: Miguel Ojeda Cc: Andrea Parri , Peter Zijlstra , Akira Yokosawa , Will Deacon , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, David Howells , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org, Alan Stern , "Paul E. McKenney" , Boqun Feng , Daniel Lustig , Nicholas Piggin , Luc Maranget , Eli Friedman , Jade Alglave , Network Development , Nick Desaulniers , LKML , Eric Christopher , Joe Perches , Linus Torvalds , Luc Van Oostenryck List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 11:35:52AM +0100, Miguel Ojeda wrote: > On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 6:44 PM Nick Desaulniers wrote: > > > > Also for more context, see: > > commit 7829fb09a2b4 ("lib: make memzero_explicit more robust against > > dead store elimination") > > By the way, shouldn't that barrier_data() be directly in compiler.h > too, since it is for both gcc & clang? > > > Reviewed-by: Nick Desaulniers > > > > + Miguel > > Miguel, would you mind taking this into your compiler-attributes tree? > > Sure, at least we get quickly some linux-next time. BTW why linux-next? shouldn't this go into 5.0 and stable? It's a bugfix after all. > Note it would be nice to separate the patch into two (one for the > comments, another for OPTIMIZER_HIDE_VAR), and also possibly another > for barrier_data(). > > Cheers, > Miguel