From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266209AbUHGB0T (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Aug 2004 21:26:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266211AbUHGB0T (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Aug 2004 21:26:19 -0400 Received: from hermes.fachschaften.tu-muenchen.de ([129.187.202.12]:28649 "HELO hermes.fachschaften.tu-muenchen.de") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S266209AbUHGB0S (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Aug 2004 21:26:18 -0400 Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 03:26:15 +0200 From: Adrian Bunk To: Andi Kleen Cc: Tim Bird , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Is extern inline -> static inline OK? Message-ID: <20040807012614.GC17708@fs.tum.de> References: <2q0Wb-2Tc-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <2q1pe-3hq-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <2qlo1-wO-37@gated-at.bofh.it> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Aug 07, 2004 at 01:26:04AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > Tim Bird writes: > > > > From what I have read, for either 'extern inline' or 'static inline' > > the compiler is free to not inline the code. Is this wrong? > > Yes, it's wrong in current Linux 2.6. It currently defines inline to > inline __attribute__((always_inline)) >... To be more exact: It's defined this way in both 2.4 and 2.6, but only for gcc >= 3.1 (which support __attribute__((always_inline)) ). > Hope this helps, > > -Andi cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed