From 90dfeef1cd38dff19f8b3a752d13bfd79f0f7694 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Peter Zijlstra Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2025 11:43:32 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] seqlock: Cure some more scoped_seqlock() optimization fails Arnd reported an x86 randconfig using gcc-15 tripped over __scoped_seqlock_bug(). Turns out GCC chose not to inline the scoped_seqlock helper functions and as such was not able to optimize properly. [ mingo: Clang fails the build too in some circumstances. ] Reported-by: Arnd Bergmann Tested-by: Arnd Bergmann Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar Cc: Oleg Nesterov Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20251204104332.GG2528459@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net --- include/linux/seqlock.h | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/linux/seqlock.h b/include/linux/seqlock.h index a8a8661839b63..221123660e710 100644 --- a/include/linux/seqlock.h +++ b/include/linux/seqlock.h @@ -1224,7 +1224,7 @@ struct ss_tmp { spinlock_t *lock_irqsave; }; -static inline void __scoped_seqlock_cleanup(struct ss_tmp *sst) +static __always_inline void __scoped_seqlock_cleanup(struct ss_tmp *sst) { if (sst->lock) spin_unlock(sst->lock); @@ -1252,7 +1252,7 @@ static inline void __scoped_seqlock_bug(void) { } extern void __scoped_seqlock_bug(void); #endif -static inline void +static __always_inline void __scoped_seqlock_next(struct ss_tmp *sst, seqlock_t *lock, enum ss_state target) { switch (sst->state) { -- 2.47.3