Re: [PATCH] x86: simplify sync_test_bit()

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>]

Jan Beulich wrote:
> I'm usually intentionally using just the names, without parameters and
> not as inline, in such alias definitions so that in case the name gets used
> as a function pointer (arguably unlikely here) there's not going to be
> any missing definition or duplicate function instantiation. But from a
> functionality point of view, either of the alternatives you suggest is
> of course as good.

I'm especially wary of the naked #define, since it will affect any 
instance of sync_test_bit:

struct bit_thingy {
	unsigned sync_test_bit:1;
	unsigned other_test_bit:1;
	...
};

J