From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752632AbcDZIf0 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 26 Apr 2016 04:35:26 -0400
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:50632 "EHLO
	bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752409AbcDZIfX (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 26 Apr 2016 04:35:23 -0400
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 01:35:16 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>,
        Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, jamborm@gcc.gnu.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Himanshu Madhani <himanshu.madhani@qlogic.com>,
        qla2xxx-upstream@qlogic.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: fc: force inlining of wwn conversion functions
Message-ID: <20160426083516.GC364@infradead.org>
References: <20160419085221.GA29087@gmail.com>
 <yq1lh41gki4.fsf@sermon.lab.mkp.net>
 <1461641851.2392.32.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
 <5249561.9VpAPLD61M@wuerfel>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5249561.9VpAPLD61M@wuerfel>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from <hch@infradead.org> by bombadil.infradead.org. See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 09:22:46AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > Agree, plus, as I've said before, we have 3-4 weeks before we go final,
> > so we still have some time before a decision has to be made.  It looks
> > like the gcc people already have a patch for the compiler, so the
> > distributions could just push that out through channels.
> 
> I don't think we can realistically blacklist gcc-4.9.{0,1,2,3},
> gcc-5.{0,1,2,3}.* and gcc-6.0 and require everyone to upgrade to compilers
> that have not been released yet in order to build a linux-4.6 kernel.

Agreed.  What about just removing the wrappers?  They seem fairly
pointless to start with.