From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Jackson Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] cleanup ACPI numa warnings Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 10:57:29 -0700 Sender: acpi-devel-admin-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Message-ID: <20040807105729.6adea633.pj@sgi.com> References: <1091738798.22406.9.camel@tdi> <1091739702.31490.245.camel@nighthawk> <1091741142.22406.28.camel@tdi> <249150000.1091763309@[10.10.2.4]> <20040805205059.3fb67b71.rddunlap@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20040805205059.3fb67b71.rddunlap-3NddpPZAyC0@public.gmane.org> Errors-To: acpi-devel-admin-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: To: "Randy.Dunlap" Cc: mbligh-/CzTsIfkJEdBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org, alex.williamson-VXdhtT5mjnY@public.gmane.org, haveblue-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org > And there's nothing in CodingStyle that agrees with you that I could find. >>From the file Documentation/SubmittingPatches: 3) 'static inline' is better than a macro Static inline functions are greatly preferred over macros. They provide type safety, have no length limitations, no formatting limitations, and under gcc they are as cheap as macros. Macros should only be used for cases where a static inline is clearly suboptimal [there a few, isolated cases of this in fast paths], or where it is impossible to use a static inline function [such as string-izing]. -- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson 1.650.933.1373 ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by OSTG. Have you noticed the changes on Linux.com, ITManagersJournal and NewsForge in the past few weeks? Now, one more big change to announce. We are now OSTG- Open Source Technology Group. Come see the changes on the new OSTG site. www.ostg.com From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263971AbUHGR6g (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Aug 2004 13:58:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263980AbUHGR6f (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Aug 2004 13:58:35 -0400 Received: from omx2-ext.sgi.com ([192.48.171.19]:13486 "EHLO omx2.sgi.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263971AbUHGR6Z (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Aug 2004 13:58:25 -0400 Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 10:57:29 -0700 From: Paul Jackson To: "Randy.Dunlap" Cc: mbligh@aracnet.com, alex.williamson@hp.com, haveblue@us.ibm.com, acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [ACPI] Re: [PATCH] cleanup ACPI numa warnings Message-Id: <20040807105729.6adea633.pj@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <20040805205059.3fb67b71.rddunlap@osdl.org> References: <1091738798.22406.9.camel@tdi> <1091739702.31490.245.camel@nighthawk> <1091741142.22406.28.camel@tdi> <249150000.1091763309@[10.10.2.4]> <20040805205059.3fb67b71.rddunlap@osdl.org> Organization: SGI X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.10claws (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > And there's nothing in CodingStyle that agrees with you that I could find. >>From the file Documentation/SubmittingPatches: 3) 'static inline' is better than a macro Static inline functions are greatly preferred over macros. They provide type safety, have no length limitations, no formatting limitations, and under gcc they are as cheap as macros. Macros should only be used for cases where a static inline is clearly suboptimal [there a few, isolated cases of this in fast paths], or where it is impossible to use a static inline function [such as string-izing]. -- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson 1.650.933.1373