From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: [PATCH] Don't inline string functions Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 09:41:59 -0700 Message-ID: <20140514094159.435928e3@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> References: <20140514081932.37847146@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> <1559974.KXN93MZ8m0@xps13> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org To: Thomas Monjalon Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1559974.KXN93MZ8m0@xps13> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org Sender: "dev" On Wed, 14 May 2014 17:47:01 +0200 Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2014-05-14 08:19, Stephen Hemminger: > > It makes no sense to inline string functions, in fact snprintf > > can't be inlined because the function supports variable number of > > arguments. > > > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger > > > > --- > > Resend because of lack of response > > Please do not resend patches. I prefer a ping request in the original thread. > > By the way, you didn't take into account my first comments: > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-April/002028.html All the issues there are changed. includes, copyright etc. > and I'm still waiting answers to these patches: > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-March/001673.html This is in the rte_sched group. patch 1 > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-March/001676.html This is more of a mess than want to get into right now. header conflicts are nuisance.