Re: [PATCH v1 1/4] dmi: Introduce dmi_get_bios_year() helper

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>]

On Fri, 2018-02-23 at 15:35 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 02:59:20PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > It's used in several places and more users may come.
> > By using this helper they may create a slightly cleaner code.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >  include/linux/dmi.h | 7 +++++++
> >  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/linux/dmi.h b/include/linux/dmi.h
> > index 46e151172d95..241c27008c70 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/dmi.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/dmi.h
> > @@ -147,4 +147,11 @@ static inline const struct dmi_system_id *
> >  
> >  #endif
> >  
> > +static inline int dmi_get_bios_year(void)
> > +{
> > +	int year;
> > +	dmi_get_date(DMI_BIOS_DATE, &year, NULL, NULL);
> > +	return year;
> > +}
> 
> I don't really care personally, and I assume this series will go via a
> non-PCI tree, but making this inline looks similar to this, which
> wasn't well-received:
> 
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CA+55aFypU331cQy-
> 6ZJ6szF=2KVLqcbwCUGd+gTwPViRqRWN+g@mail.gmail.com

"Yes, that header file is already full of random inline functions, but
they are generally wrapper functions that don't really do anything, ..."

I think the function above is exactly from the "wrapper that doesn't
really do anything" category.

-- 
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy