Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S966486AbcLWKs5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Dec 2016 05:48:57 -0500 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:35448 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751529AbcLWKs4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Dec 2016 05:48:56 -0500 Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 11:48:44 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Nicolai =?iso-8859-1?Q?H=E4hnle?= Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Nicolai =?iso-8859-1?Q?H=E4hnle?= , Ingo Molnar , Maarten Lankhorst , Daniel Vetter , Chris Wilson , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 05/12] locking/ww_mutex: Remove the __ww_mutex_lock inline wrappers Message-ID: <20161223104844.GN3107@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <1482346000-9927-1-git-send-email-nhaehnle@gmail.com> <1482346000-9927-6-git-send-email-nhaehnle@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <1482346000-9927-6-git-send-email-nhaehnle@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2249 Lines: 60 On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 07:46:33PM +0100, Nicolai Hähnle wrote: > diff --git a/include/linux/ww_mutex.h b/include/linux/ww_mutex.h > index a5960e5..b2eaaab 100644 > --- a/include/linux/ww_mutex.h > +++ b/include/linux/ww_mutex.h > @@ -186,11 +186,6 @@ static inline void ww_acquire_fini(struct ww_acquire_ctx *ctx) > #endif > } > > -extern int __must_check __ww_mutex_lock(struct ww_mutex *lock, > - struct ww_acquire_ctx *ctx); > -extern int __must_check __ww_mutex_lock_interruptible(struct ww_mutex *lock, > - struct ww_acquire_ctx *ctx); > - > /** > * ww_mutex_lock - acquire the w/w mutex > * @lock: the mutex to be acquired > @@ -220,10 +215,8 @@ extern int __must_check __ww_mutex_lock_interruptible(struct ww_mutex *lock, > * > * A mutex acquired with this function must be released with ww_mutex_unlock. > */ > -static inline int ww_mutex_lock(struct ww_mutex *lock, struct ww_acquire_ctx *ctx) > -{ > - return __ww_mutex_lock(lock, ctx); > -} > +extern int __must_check ww_mutex_lock(struct ww_mutex *lock, > + struct ww_acquire_ctx *ctx); > > /** > * ww_mutex_lock_interruptible - acquire the w/w mutex, interruptible > @@ -255,11 +248,8 @@ static inline int ww_mutex_lock(struct ww_mutex *lock, struct ww_acquire_ctx *ct > * > * A mutex acquired with this function must be released with ww_mutex_unlock. > */ > -static inline int __must_check ww_mutex_lock_interruptible(struct ww_mutex *lock, > - struct ww_acquire_ctx *ctx) > -{ > - return __ww_mutex_lock_interruptible(lock, ctx); > -} > +extern int __must_check ww_mutex_lock_interruptible(struct ww_mutex *lock, > + struct ww_acquire_ctx *ctx); > > /** > * ww_mutex_lock_slow - slowpath acquiring of the w/w mutex > diff --git a/kernel/locking/mutex.c b/kernel/locking/mutex.c > index a41bec2..282c6de 100644 For some reason this patch appears to make lib/locking-selftest.c really unhappy. I get endless streams of: ../lib/locking-selftest.c: In function ‘ww_test_fail_acquire’: ../lib/locking-selftest.c:1141:6: error: void value not ignored as it ought to be ret = WWL(&o, &t); ^ Apparently GCC gets confused about __much_check on inline functions or something, or I got the patch wrong.