locking/static_key: always define static_branch_deferred_inc

From: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>

This interface is currently only defined if CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL. Make it
available also when jump labels are disabled.

Fixes: ad282a8117d50 ("locking/static_key: Add support for deferred static branches")
Signed-off-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>

---

The original patch went into 5.2-rc1, but this interface is not yet
used, so this could target either 5.2 or 5.3.

---
 include/linux/jump_label_ratelimit.h | 5 +++--
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 15:44:09 -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> From: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>
> 
> This interface is currently only defined if CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL. Make it
> available also when jump labels are disabled.
> 
> Fixes: ad282a8117d50 ("locking/static_key: Add support for deferred static branches")
> Signed-off-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>
> 
> ---
> 
> The original patch went into 5.2-rc1, but this interface is not yet
> used, so this could target either 5.2 or 5.3.

Can we drop the Fixes tag?  It's an ugly omission but not a bug fix.

Are you planning to switch clean_acked_data_enable() to the helper once
merged?

Thanks!

> diff --git a/include/linux/jump_label_ratelimit.h b/include/linux/jump_label_ratelimit.h
> index 42710d5949ba..8c3ee291b2d8 100644
> --- a/include/linux/jump_label_ratelimit.h
> +++ b/include/linux/jump_label_ratelimit.h
> @@ -60,8 +60,6 @@ extern void jump_label_update_timeout(struct work_struct *work);
>  						   0),			\
>  	}
>  
> -#define static_branch_deferred_inc(x)	static_branch_inc(&(x)->key)
> -
>  #else	/* !CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL */
>  struct static_key_deferred {
>  	struct static_key  key;
> @@ -95,4 +93,7 @@ jump_label_rate_limit(struct static_key_deferred *key,
>  	STATIC_KEY_CHECK_USE(key);
>  }
>  #endif	/* CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL */
> +
> +#define static_branch_deferred_inc(x)	static_branch_inc(&(x)->key)
> +
>  #endif	/* _LINUX_JUMP_LABEL_RATELIMIT_H */

On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 3:59 PM Jakub Kicinski
<jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 15:44:09 -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > From: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>
> >
> > This interface is currently only defined if CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL. Make it
> > available also when jump labels are disabled.
> >
> > Fixes: ad282a8117d50 ("locking/static_key: Add support for deferred static branches")
> > Signed-off-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>
> >
> > ---
> >
> > The original patch went into 5.2-rc1, but this interface is not yet
> > used, so this could target either 5.2 or 5.3.
>
> Can we drop the Fixes tag?  It's an ugly omission but not a bug fix.
>
> Are you planning to switch clean_acked_data_enable() to the helper once
> merged?

Definitely, can do.

Perhaps it's easiest to send both as a single patch set through net-next, then?

On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 16:25:16 -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 3:59 PM Jakub Kicinski
> <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 15:44:09 -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:  
> > > From: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>
> > >
> > > This interface is currently only defined if CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL. Make it
> > > available also when jump labels are disabled.
> > >
> > > Fixes: ad282a8117d50 ("locking/static_key: Add support for deferred static branches")
> > > Signed-off-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>
> > >
> > > ---
> > >
> > > The original patch went into 5.2-rc1, but this interface is not yet
> > > used, so this could target either 5.2 or 5.3.  
> >
> > Can we drop the Fixes tag?  It's an ugly omission but not a bug fix.
> >
> > Are you planning to switch clean_acked_data_enable() to the helper once
> > merged?  
> 
> Definitely, can do.
> 
> Perhaps it's easiest to send both as a single patch set through net-next, then?

I'd think so too, perhaps we can get a blessing from Peter for that :)

On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 01:56:27PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 16:25:16 -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 3:59 PM Jakub Kicinski
> > <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 15:44:09 -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:  
> > > > From: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>
> > > >
> > > > This interface is currently only defined if CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL. Make it
> > > > available also when jump labels are disabled.
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: ad282a8117d50 ("locking/static_key: Add support for deferred static branches")
> > > > Signed-off-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > The original patch went into 5.2-rc1, but this interface is not yet
> > > > used, so this could target either 5.2 or 5.3.  
> > >
> > > Can we drop the Fixes tag?  It's an ugly omission but not a bug fix.
> > >
> > > Are you planning to switch clean_acked_data_enable() to the helper once
> > > merged?  
> > 
> > Definitely, can do.
> > 
> > Perhaps it's easiest to send both as a single patch set through net-next, then?
> 
> I'd think so too, perhaps we can get a blessing from Peter for that :)

Sure that works, I don't think there's anything else pending for this
file to conflict with.

Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>

On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 5:33 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 01:56:27PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 16:25:16 -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 3:59 PM Jakub Kicinski
> > > <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 15:44:09 -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > > > > From: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > This interface is currently only defined if CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL. Make it
> > > > > available also when jump labels are disabled.
> > > > >
> > > > > Fixes: ad282a8117d50 ("locking/static_key: Add support for deferred static branches")
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > >
> > > > > The original patch went into 5.2-rc1, but this interface is not yet
> > > > > used, so this could target either 5.2 or 5.3.
> > > >
> > > > Can we drop the Fixes tag?  It's an ugly omission but not a bug fix.
> > > >
> > > > Are you planning to switch clean_acked_data_enable() to the helper once
> > > > merged?
> > >
> > > Definitely, can do.
> > >
> > > Perhaps it's easiest to send both as a single patch set through net-next, then?
> >
> > I'd think so too, perhaps we can get a blessing from Peter for that :)
>
> Sure that works, I don't think there's anything else pending for this
> file to conflict with.
>
> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>

Great, thanks. Sent

http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/netdev/list/?series=113601