diff mbox series

[v3,3/5] hexagon/bitops: force inlining of all bitops functions

Message ID 20231217071250.892867-4-mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr
State New
Headers
Series [RFC] lib: test_bitops: add compile-time optimization/evaluations assertions |

Commit Message

Vincent Mailhol Dec. 17, 2023, 7:12 a.m. UTC 
  The inline keyword actually does not guarantee that the compiler will
inline a functions. Whenever the goal is to actually inline a
function, __always_inline should always be preferred instead.

Reference: commit 8dd5032d9c54 ("x86/asm/bitops: Force inlining of
test_and_set_bit and friends")
Link: https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/8dd5032d9c54

Signed-off-by: Vincent Mailhol <mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
---
 arch/hexagon/include/asm/bitops.h | 22 +++++++++++-----------
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/arch/hexagon/include/asm/bitops.h b/arch/hexagon/include/asm/bitops.h
index 160d8f37fa1a..950d4acc2edc 100644
--- a/arch/hexagon/include/asm/bitops.h
+++ b/arch/hexagon/include/asm/bitops.h
@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ 
  * @nr:  bit number to clear
  * @addr:  pointer to memory
  */
-static inline int test_and_clear_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)
+static __always_inline int test_and_clear_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)
 {
 	int oldval;
 
@@ -52,7 +52,7 @@  static inline int test_and_clear_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)
  * @nr:  bit number to set
  * @addr:  pointer to memory
  */
-static inline int test_and_set_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)
+static __always_inline int test_and_set_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)
 {
 	int oldval;
 
@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@  static inline int test_and_set_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)
  * @nr:  bit number to set
  * @addr:  pointer to memory
  */
-static inline int test_and_change_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)
+static __always_inline int test_and_change_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)
 {
 	int oldval;
 
@@ -103,17 +103,17 @@  static inline int test_and_change_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)
  * Rewrite later to save a cycle or two.
  */
 
-static inline void clear_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)
+static __always_inline void clear_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)
 {
 	test_and_clear_bit(nr, addr);
 }
 
-static inline void set_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)
+static __always_inline void set_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)
 {
 	test_and_set_bit(nr, addr);
 }
 
-static inline void change_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)
+static __always_inline void change_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)
 {
 	test_and_change_bit(nr, addr);
 }
@@ -200,7 +200,7 @@  arch_test_bit_acquire(unsigned long nr, const volatile unsigned long *addr)
  *
  * Undefined if no zero exists, so code should check against ~0UL first.
  */
-static inline long ffz(int x)
+static __always_inline long ffz(int x)
 {
 	int r;
 
@@ -217,7 +217,7 @@  static inline long ffz(int x)
  * This is defined the same way as ffs.
  * Note fls(0) = 0, fls(1) = 1, fls(0x80000000) = 32.
  */
-static inline int fls(unsigned int x)
+static __always_inline int fls(unsigned int x)
 {
 	int r;
 
@@ -238,7 +238,7 @@  static inline int fls(unsigned int x)
  * the libc and compiler builtin ffs routines, therefore
  * differs in spirit from the above ffz (man ffs).
  */
-static inline int ffs(int x)
+static __always_inline int ffs(int x)
 {
 	int r;
 
@@ -260,7 +260,7 @@  static inline int ffs(int x)
  * bits_per_long assumed to be 32
  * numbering starts at 0 I think (instead of 1 like ffs)
  */
-static inline unsigned long __ffs(unsigned long word)
+static __always_inline unsigned long __ffs(unsigned long word)
 {
 	int num;
 
@@ -278,7 +278,7 @@  static inline unsigned long __ffs(unsigned long word)
  * Undefined if no set bit exists, so code should check against 0 first.
  * bits_per_long assumed to be 32
  */
-static inline unsigned long __fls(unsigned long word)
+static __always_inline unsigned long __fls(unsigned long word)
 {
 	int num;