Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 9 Apr 2021 13:16:24 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Cc:     Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>, linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>,
        "Steven Rostedt (VMware)" <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: Re: static_branch/jump_label vs branch merging
Message-ID: <YHA3iGyT5dMq7/06@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <YG80wg/2iZjXfCDJ@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <CAMj1kXGngxH0VCHyREKeLau=159sRkWYKVZwOV84r6dvCqXcig@mail.gmail.com>
 <877dlbzq09.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <877dlbzq09.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 12:55:18PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Ard Biesheuvel:
> 
> > Wouldn't that require the compiler to interpret the contents of the
> > asm() block?
> 
> Yes and no.  It would require proper toolchain support, so in this case
> a new ELF relocation type, with compiler, assembler, and linker support
> to generate those relocations and process them.  As far as I understand
> it, the kernel doesn't do things this way.

I don't think that all is needed. All we need is for the compiler to
recognise that:

	if (cond) {
		stmt-A;
	}
	if (cond) {
		stmt-B;
	}

both cond are equivalent and hence can merge the blocks like:

	if (cond) {
		stmt-A;
		stmt-B;
	}

But because @cond is some super opaque asm crap, the compiler throws up
it's imaginry hands and says it cannot possibly tell and leaves them as
is.