On 6/15/2020 10:00 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 09:34:58AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>
>> OK, so this has been dropped for spi/for-next right? How do we move from
>> there?
>
> Well, I actually have it queued up for applying so unless I pull it
> before my scripts get that far through the stuff I queued over the merge
> window it'll go in (I dropped it due to it not being a bugfix). If it
> were me I'd go with the two instruction hit from checking the flag TBH
> but otherwise I guess __always_inline should work for compilers that
> misoptimize. None of this is getting in the way of the framework so if
> everyone involved in the driver is happy to spend time optimising it
> and dealing with the fragility then it's fine by me.
OK, how about I send you an increment patch (would a fixup be okay?)
that adds __always_inline since we know from this thread that some
compilers may mis-optimize the function inlining?
--
Florian
