Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932426AbcJPQwP (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Oct 2016 12:52:15 -0400 Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:25744 "EHLO userp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754974AbcJPQwH (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Oct 2016 12:52:07 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/12] jump_label: declare jump table as external array To: Peter Zijlstra References: <20161016151616.31451-1-vegard.nossum@oracle.com> <20161016151616.31451-12-vegard.nossum@oracle.com> <20161016162545.GM3142@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jiri Slaby , Linus Torvalds , "Luis R . Rodriguez" , Jason Baron , Steven Rostedt From: Vegard Nossum Message-ID: <79893565-c7bb-6abc-0a18-de78c1a0c9cc@oracle.com> Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 18:50:55 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20161016162545.GM3142@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Source-IP: aserv0022.oracle.com [141.146.126.234] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1106 Lines: 30 On 10/16/2016 06:25 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 05:16:15PM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote: >> Cc: Jason Baron >> Cc: Peter Zijlstra >> Cc: Steven Rostedt >> Signed-off-by: Vegard Nossum > > NAK, -ENOCHANGELOG. > Hi Peter, It's true I didn't put an RFC tag on this (mostly because git-send-email doesn't seem to have an option for it?), but the whole point of doing these other patches (03-12) was to demonstrate what the patches would look like for some other kernel code and ask for feedback on the overall interface/approach. I don't know if you read the introduction and first patch in the series, but I'd expect that to be more than enough to understand the problem. If we really have to repeat the rationale for every patch, can we reuse this? "Comparisons between pointers to different arrays is technically undefined behaviour and recent GCCs may incorrectly optimise away loop termination conditions. Use the external array accessor macros to prevent this from happening." Vegard