On Thu, 21 Dec 2017, Andi Kleen wrote:
> From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
>
> Otherwise LTO will inline them anyways and cause a large
> kernel text increase.
>
> Since the explicit intention here is to not inline them marking
> them noinline is good documentation even for the non LTO case.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
> ---
> kernel/locking/spinlock.c | 56
> +++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
How is that patch x86 specific?
Cc'in the maintainers of that is not optional either.
Thanks,
tglx
