On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 09:36:41PM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:

On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 11:35:52AM +0100, Miguel Ojeda wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 6:44 PM Nick Desaulniers [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Also for more context, see:
commit 7829fb09a2b4 ("lib: make memzero_explicit more robust against
dead store elimination")

By the way, shouldn't that barrier_data() be directly in compiler.h
too, since it is for both gcc & clang?

quoted

Reviewed-by: Nick Desaulniers <redacted>

+ Miguel
Miguel, would you mind taking this into your compiler-attributes tree?

Sure, at least we get quickly some linux-next time.

BTW why linux-next? shouldn't this go into 5.0 and stable? It's a bugfix after all.

It doesn't hurt to put things in linux-next for a week and then 5.0 and
-stable.  Not a lot of testing happens on linux-next, but some does.

regards,
dan carpenter