Re: can someone explain "inline" once and for all?

[Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>]

On Fri, Jan 19, 2007 at 03:15:03PM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>...
> That's still a long way ahead (the 4.3 development cycle has just
> started), but it wouldn't hurt to start fixing incompatibilities
> sooner rather than later, and coming up with a clean and uniform set
> of inline macros that express intended meaning for the kernel to use.

I had already removed most of the "extern inline"s in the kernel since 
they give warnings with -Wmissing-prototypes (which I'd like to enable 
long-term in the kernel since it helps discovering a class of nasty 
runtime errors).

As far as I can see, all we need is "static inline" with the semantics
"force inlining" for functions in header files and perhaps a handful of 
functions in C files (if any).

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