Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 18 Apr 2008 15:34:55 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: Introduce down_killable() |
| |
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 17:05:06 GMT Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> wrote:
> --- a/kernel/semaphore.c > +++ b/kernel/semaphore.c > @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ > > static noinline void __down(struct semaphore *sem); > static noinline int __down_interruptible(struct semaphore *sem); > +static noinline int __down_killable(struct semaphore *sem); > static noinline void __up(struct semaphore *sem);
What is the reason for all the noinlines in this file?
Something to do with getting proper wchan output? I guess it doesn't hurt from a documentation POV, but did you find that it was actually necessary?
IOW: is gcc now capable of secretly inlining functions which are defined further ahead in the compilation unit?
(did you actually "test" the wchan stuff, btw?)
| |