From: Michael S.Zick <mszick@goquest.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@debian.org>
Cc: Joel Soete <jsoe0708@tiscali.be>, parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org
Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] Re: gcc-3.2 -> gcc-3.3 transition on hppa
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 17:17:16 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <03031617171601.01171@wolf466> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030316230611.GS29631@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk>
On Sunday 16 March 2003 05:06 pm, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 16, 2003 at 04:52:19PM -0600, Michael S. Zick wrote:
> > On Friday 14 March 2003 07:17 am, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > net/core/rtnetlink.c:extern __inline__ int rtnetlink_rcv_skb(struct
> > > sk_buff *skb)
> >
> > Stolen from the GCC thread on 3.x.x inlining...
> > - - - - GCC - - - - -
> > For the record, the kernel doesn't need this any more. Go check 2.5;
> > new versions of <linux/compiler.h> contain this line:
> > #define inline __inline__ __attribute__((always_inline))
> > - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > That forces GCC to ignore its changed inline metrics and simply inline
> > the function.
>
> Yes, but...
>
> * Joel's using 2.4, not 2.5
Exactly why I mentioned it.
> * #define inline doesn't help functions which are marked as __inline__
If he follows your suggestion of dropping the "__" around "inline" it will.
>
> This isn't a function which absolutely needs to be inlined. It can
> be `static inline' and gcc can do whatever it likes then.
The subject is getting a lot of discussion on the GCC list. I only mentioned
this one workaround so that Joel could get on with his work before the issue
is settled on the GCC list.
Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-03-16 23:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <15968.40812.741982.606734@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
[not found] ` <15969.1828.456001.122737@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
2003-03-02 4:59 ` [parisc-linux] Re: gcc-3.2 -> gcc-3.3 transition on hppa Randolph Chung
2003-03-02 4:59 ` Randolph Chung
2003-03-02 5:40 ` John David Anglin
2003-03-02 5:40 ` John David Anglin
2003-03-02 9:24 ` M. Grabert
2003-03-02 9:24 ` M. Grabert
2003-03-02 17:01 ` Randolph Chung
2003-03-02 17:01 ` Randolph Chung
2003-03-02 18:50 ` John David Anglin
2003-03-02 18:50 ` John David Anglin
2003-03-03 14:27 ` Joel Soete
2003-03-03 16:17 ` John David Anglin
2003-03-03 16:24 ` Randolph Chung
2003-03-03 17:22 ` Joel Soete
2003-03-03 16:17 ` John David Anglin
2003-03-03 14:27 ` Joel Soete
2003-03-09 20:06 ` Matthias Klose
2003-03-09 20:27 ` John David Anglin
2003-03-09 20:27 ` John David Anglin
2003-03-09 20:45 ` Randolph Chung
2003-03-09 20:45 ` Randolph Chung
2003-03-09 20:06 ` Matthias Klose
2003-03-12 17:33 ` Joel Soete
2003-03-12 17:35 ` Randolph Chung
2003-03-12 17:35 ` Randolph Chung
2003-03-12 17:53 ` Joel Soete
2003-03-12 17:53 ` Joel Soete
2003-03-14 12:48 ` Joel Soete
2003-03-14 13:17 ` Matthew Wilcox
2003-03-14 13:17 ` Matthew Wilcox
2003-03-14 16:31 ` Joel Soete
2003-03-14 16:31 ` Joel Soete
2003-03-18 18:14 ` b.gunreben
2003-03-18 18:53 ` John David Anglin
2003-03-18 19:02 ` Randolph Chung
2003-03-18 19:16 ` John David Anglin
2003-03-18 19:16 ` John David Anglin
2003-03-18 20:21 ` Randolph Chung
2003-03-18 20:21 ` Randolph Chung
2003-03-18 20:55 ` John David Anglin
2003-03-18 20:55 ` John David Anglin
2003-03-20 17:51 ` Joel Soete
2003-03-20 18:13 ` John David Anglin
2003-03-20 18:23 ` John David Anglin
2003-03-21 12:44 ` Joel Soete
2003-03-21 12:44 ` Joel Soete
2003-03-21 13:36 ` Matthew Wilcox
2003-03-21 15:07 ` Joel Soete
2003-03-20 18:23 ` John David Anglin
2003-03-20 18:13 ` John David Anglin
2003-03-20 17:51 ` Joel Soete
2003-03-18 19:02 ` Randolph Chung
2003-03-18 21:59 ` John David Anglin
2003-03-18 21:59 ` John David Anglin
2003-03-18 18:53 ` John David Anglin
2003-03-18 18:14 ` b.gunreben
2003-03-16 22:52 ` Michael S.Zick
2003-03-16 23:06 ` Matthew Wilcox
2003-03-16 23:17 ` Michael S.Zick [this message]
2003-03-20 18:20 ` Joel Soete
2003-03-14 12:48 ` Joel Soete
2003-03-20 18:06 ` Joel Soete
2003-03-20 18:06 ` Joel Soete
2003-03-12 17:33 ` Joel Soete
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=03031617171601.01171@wolf466 \
--to=mszick@goquest.com \
--cc=jsoe0708@tiscali.be \
--cc=parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org \
--cc=willy@debian.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox