Re: [patch] x86: phase out forced inlining

Harvey Harrison
2008-03-04T18:14:19Z

On Tue, 2008-03-04 at 10:09 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Harvey Harrison wrote:
> >
> >> __inline__ : 1380
> >
> > Lots of them in include/asm-*...not sure if there is a reason for this.
> >
>
> Preferred form for code that's exported to userspace (since gcc
> complains with -ansi -pedantic otherwise.)
>

Figured it would be something like that. Would it be reasonable to move
towards eliminating __inline?

Also, since the exported headers already go through unifdef, could we
move to using inline everywhere in the kernel and add a processing step
to make it __inline__ in the exported headers?

Harvey