Re: [PATCH 1/3] s390/mm: Drop all pxdp_get()

[Anshuman Khandual]

On Wed, Sep 23, 2026 at 04:32:47PM +0200, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2026 at 05:42:00PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 23, 2026 at 11:16:29AM +0200, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2026 at 10:02:20AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> > > > +static inline pte_t ptep_get(const pte_t *ptep);
> > > > +static inline pud_t pudp_get(const pud_t *pudp);
> > > > +static inline p4d_t p4dp_get(const p4d_t *p4dp);
> > > > +static inline pgd_t pgdp_get(const pgd_t *pgdp);
> ...
> > > > -#define ptep_get ptep_get
> > > > -static inline pte_t ptep_get(pte_t *ptep)
> > > > -{
> > > > -	return READ_ONCE(*ptep);
> > > > -}
> > > 
> > > As reported by Sashiko, this results in a compile error due to conflicting
> > > types; but I don't see too much value with this patch if a forward declaration
> > > of the common code implementation needs to be added instead. Looks like s390
> > > would be the only architecture which would have that.
> > 
> > We could move pxdp_get() caller functions from this header inside C files
> > like other platform changes proposed here. Would that be better instead ?
> 
> That would make pud_clear() & friends real functions calls instead of being
> inlined. Function calls are more expensive, so I would like to avoid that.
> 
> I would prefer to drop this patch.

Alright, thanks for your review.