From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 12:54:52 +0200 From: Sam Ravnborg Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: More __meminit annotations. Message-ID: <20070618105452.GA22386@uranus.ravnborg.org> References: <20070618045229.GA31635@linux-sh.org> <20070618143943.B108.Y-GOTO@jp.fujitsu.com> <20070618074529.GA21222@uranus.ravnborg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Satyam Sharma Cc: Yasunori Goto , Paul Mundt , Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > But then what > might happen is that everybody would think his particular use of inline > is correct and beneficial and all users of inline in kernel would end up > as __always_inline anyway. You miss that there is a big difference between "beneficial" and "needs". The latter is used when some assembly code has a specific knowlegde of how parameters are passed or that the function signature for other good reasons must not change. It has nothing to do with "beneficial". Any use of __always_inline outside arch/* is highly question able. And most use of *inline* in drivers/* today is due to bad behaving gcc in the past. Sam -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org