Re: [PATCH 01/26] mm: asi: Make some utility functions noinstr compatible

[Brendan Jackman]

On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 at 02:44, Junaid Shahid <junaids@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> In any case, I guess we could just mark these functions as plain noinstr.

I wonder if it also would be worth having something like

/*
 * Inline this function so it can be called from noinstr,
 * but it wouldn't actually care itself about being instrumented.
 */
#define inline_for_noinstr __always_inline

Maybe there are already __always_inline functions this would apply to.
Then again, if you care about inlining them so much that you can't
just write "noinstr", then it's probably hot/small enough that
__always_inline would make sense regardless of noinstr.

Probably I'm over-thinking it at this point.