Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] make use of gcc 9's "asm inline()"
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>,
        Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
References: <20190829083233.24162-1-linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
 <CAHk-=wihp7KZ_WjA16odsU7eGb-rUfg7J0rhqwhRoD0zjyGHpw@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
Message-ID: <c3b71dff-c884-28b6-a4c7-ff2bf12720d4@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
Date:   Fri, 30 Aug 2019 09:45:07 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wihp7KZ_WjA16odsU7eGb-rUfg7J0rhqwhRoD0zjyGHpw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 29/08/2019 18.05, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 1:32 AM Rasmus Villemoes
> <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk> wrote:
>>
>> But since we #define the identifier inline to attach some attributes,
>> we have to use the alternate spelling __inline__ of that
>> keyword. Unfortunately, we also currently #define that one (to
>> inline), so we first have to get rid of all (mis)uses of
>> __inline__. Hence the huge diffstat.
> 
> Ugh. Not pretty, but I guess we're stuck with it.
> 
> However, it worries me a bit that you excluide the UAPI headers where
> we still use "__inline__", and now the semantics of that will change
> for the kernel (for some odd gcc versions).

Yeah, as I wrote I was aware of that, but didn't have any good ideas, so
I was fishing. Doing

#ifdef __KERNEL__
#define __uapi_inline inline
#else
#define __uapi_inline __inline__
#endif

was one of the bad ideas...

> I suspect we should just bite the bullet and you should do it to the
> uapi headers too. We already use "inline" in a lot of them, so it's
> not the case that we're using __inline__ because of some namespace
> issue, as far as I can tell.
> 
> One option might be to just use "__inline" for the asm_inline thing.
> We have way fewer of those. That would make the noise much less for
> this patch series.

Ah, interesting. I didn't know that was also a compiler provided alias.
It seems to be entirely undocumented -
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Alternate-Keywords.html just mentions
the __inline__ (and __asm__) spellings. But it's clear as day in the gcc
sources

  { "__inline",         RID_INLINE,     0 },
  { "__inline__",       RID_INLINE,     0 },

and has been that way since forever, AFAICT.

So yes, let's just start by getting rid of the __inline define and fix
the staging (+acpi,zstd) users, to allow asm_inline to progress. I'll
respin.

Rasmus