From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263594AbUJ3AsC (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Oct 2004 20:48:02 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263697AbUJ3AoQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Oct 2004 20:44:16 -0400 Received: from ylpvm29-ext.prodigy.net ([207.115.57.60]:61088 "EHLO ylpvm29.prodigy.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263617AbUJ3Ak7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Oct 2004 20:40:59 -0400 From: David Brownell To: linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [linux-usb-devel] Re: [2.6 patch] usbnet.c: remove an unused function Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 17:37:04 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 Cc: Adrian Bunk , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20041028232455.GK3207@stusta.de> <200410291617.30136.david-b@pacbell.net> <20041029232742.GE6677@stusta.de> In-Reply-To: <20041029232742.GE6677@stusta.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200410291737.04415.david-b@pacbell.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday 29 October 2004 16:27, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 04:17:30PM -0700, David Brownell wrote: > > p.s. Last I looked, GCC ignored unused inlines; no code > > generated, no warnings. Did that change? > >... > > It didn't change. > > But there are three different possible reactions on my patches: > 1. ACK, kill this dead code > 2. ups, I really wanted to use this function > 3. please keep, code using this function will/might follow in the future > > Case 1 is the most common case (and this simply removes some dead code). > > I had until now two times case 2 (which means the code is now better). > > You are the first person for case 3. And presumably there will also be at least a few case 4: 4. no response, treated as an ACK. :)