public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>
To: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@mindspring.com>
Cc: Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>, Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Status of CONFIG_FORCED_INLINING?
Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 12:55:06 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200705241255.07300.rob@landley.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0705240836340.4500@localhost.localdomain>

On Thursday 24 May 2007 8:38 am, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Wed, 23 May 2007, Roland Dreier wrote:
> 
> >  > - every static function in a header file must be __always_inline
> >
> > Why?  Why does it matter whether a function is defined in a .h file or
> > a .c file?  Can't the compiler decide better than we can whether
> > something should be inlined or not?
> >
> > Your argument seems to imply that we should never use the inline
> > keyword at all.

Do we ever use the "register" keyword anymore?  I don't make "suggestions" to 
gcc, I hit it with a clue-by-by four.

> i hate to be in the middle of one of these again, but i think i
> initiated this topic way back when when i (like rob landley) asked why
> that config option was still around when it's been listed for deletion
> for a year.

I'm actually trying to write documentation on it.  Temporary copy at:

http://landley.net/kdocs/inline.html

> regardless of its good or bad points, one way or the other, something
> should be updated.

I'd be happy to just figure out what the policy is.  It seems like 
the "inline" keyword should no longer be used, and either say __always_inline 
or leave it to the compiler.  If there's a good counter-argument, I'd love to 
hear it.

Rob

  reply	other threads:[~2007-05-24 16:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-05-23 19:10 Status of CONFIG_FORCED_INLINING? Rob Landley
2007-05-23 19:42 ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-05-23 21:22   ` Adrian Bunk
2007-05-23 21:28     ` Roland Dreier
2007-05-24 12:38       ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-05-24 16:55         ` Rob Landley [this message]
2007-05-24 17:10       ` Adrian Bunk
2007-05-24 17:14         ` Roland Dreier
2007-05-24 17:47           ` Rob Landley
2007-05-24 17:47             ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-05-24 18:14               ` Rob Landley
2007-05-24 17:55             ` Roland Dreier
2007-05-24 18:07               ` Adrian Bunk
2007-05-24 18:32                 ` Roland Dreier
2007-05-24 22:41                   ` Adrian Bunk
2007-05-24 17:57           ` Adrian Bunk
2007-05-23 21:31     ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-05-24 17:12       ` Adrian Bunk
2007-05-24 16:29     ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-05-24 17:14       ` Adrian Bunk
2007-05-24 17:17         ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-05-24 17:40       ` Rob Landley

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=200705241255.07300.rob@landley.net \
    --to=rob@landley.net \
    --cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=bunk@stusta.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rdreier@cisco.com \
    --cc=rpjday@mindspring.com \
    /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