From: Adrian Bunk Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 18:20:01 +0000 Subject: [KJ] Re: [PATCH 8/8] Inline 3 functions Message-Id: <20051110182001.GF5376@stusta.de> MIME-Version: 1 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============63751763360175939==" List-Id: References: <436FF51D.8080509@us.ibm.com> <43737D94.2060408@us.ibm.com> <20051110173822.GD5376@stusta.de> <200511101904.23114.oliver@neukum.org> In-Reply-To: <200511101904.23114.oliver@neukum.org> To: Oliver Neukum Cc: Matthew Dobson , Pekka J Enberg , kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --===============63751763360175939== Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 07:04:22PM +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 10. November 2005 18:38 schrieb Adrian Bunk: > > > So are you suggesting that we don't mark these functions 'inline', or are > > > you just pointing out that we'll need to drop the 'inline' if there is ever > > > another caller? > > > > I'd suggest to not mark them 'inline'. > > It seems you have found one more use for sparse. How about a tag > like __single_inline that will cause a warning if a function having it > is called from more than one place? Why should such a function be manually marked "inline" at all? If a static function is called exactly once it is the job of the compiler to inline the function. > Regards > Oliver cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed --===============63751763360175939== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Kernel-janitors mailing list Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors --===============63751763360175939==--