Re: [PATCH -v7][RFC]: mutex: implement adaptive spinning

Harvey Harrison
2009-01-09T21:41:59Z

On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 22:34 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> The naming problem remains though:
>
> - Perhaps we could introduce a name for the first category: __must_inline?
> __should_inline? Not because it wouldnt mean 'always', but because it is
> 'always inline' for another reason than the correctless __always_inline.
>
> - Another possible approach wuld be to rename the second category to
> __force_inline. That would signal it rather forcefully that the inlining
> there is an absolute correctness issue.

__needs_inline? That would imply that it's for correctness reasons.

Then __always_inline is left to mean that it doesn't _need_ to be inline
but we _want_ it inline regardless of what gcc thinks?

$0.02

Harvey