On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 04:36:33PM +0200, Marco Elver wrote: > Instead of __no_kcsan_or_inline, prefer '__no_kcsan inline' in test -- > this is in case we decide to remove __no_kcsan_or_inline. > > Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> > Signed-off-by: Marco Elver <el...@google.com> > --- > > Hi Paul, > > This is to prepare eventual removal of __no_kcsan_or_inline, and avoid a > series that doesn't apply to anything other than -next (because some > bits are in -tip and the test only in -rcu; although this problem might > be solved in 2 weeks). This patch is to make sure in case the > __kcsan_or_inline series is based on -tip, integration in -next doesn't > cause problems. > > This came up in > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200529185923.go706...@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net
Thanks Marco! I just sent the rest of that patch here: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200602173103.931412...@infradead.org