summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/include/linux/blk-integrity.h
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorJohn Stultz <jstultz@google.com>2024-07-08 23:08:27 -0700
committerPeter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>2024-07-09 13:26:26 +0200
commite81859fe64ad42dccefe134d1696e0635f78d763 (patch)
tree917ad09aae5effc8d7292ae0b0d729a891033988 /include/linux/blk-integrity.h
parent9bc2ff871f00437ad2f10c1eceff51aaa72b478f (diff)
locking/rwsem: Add __always_inline annotation to __down_write_common() and inlined callers
Apparently despite it being marked inline, the compiler may not inline __down_write_common() which makes it difficult to identify the cause of lock contention, as the wchan of the blocked function will always be listed as __down_write_common(). So add __always_inline annotation to the common function (as well as the inlined helper callers) to force it to be inlined so a more useful blocking function will be listed (via wchan). This mirrors commit 92cc5d00a431 ("locking/rwsem: Add __always_inline annotation to __down_read_common() and inlined callers") which did the same for __down_read_common. I sort of worry that I'm playing wack-a-mole here, and talking with compiler people, they tell me inline means nothing, which makes me want to cry a little. So I'm wondering if we need to replace all the inlines with __always_inline, or remove them because either we mean something by it, or not. Fixes: c995e638ccbb ("locking/rwsem: Fold __down_{read,write}*()") Reported-by: Tim Murray <timmurray@google.com> Signed-off-by: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Acked-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240709060831.495366-1-jstultz@google.com
Diffstat (limited to 'include/linux/blk-integrity.h')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions