From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marek Vasut Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 18:48:03 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/4] microblaze: Fix compilation warning in ext2_find_next_zero_bit In-Reply-To: <1349441933-22840-1-git-send-email-monstr@monstr.eu> References: <1349441933-22840-1-git-send-email-monstr@monstr.eu> Message-ID: <201210051848.03806.marex@denx.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Dear Michal Simek, > ext2_find_next_zero_bit must be also static if __swab32 is also static. > > Warning: > include/asm/bitops.h:369:22: warning: '__fswab32' is static but > used in inline function 'ext2_find_next_zero_bit' > which is not static [enabled by default] > > Signed-off-by: Michal Simek > --- > arch/microblaze/include/asm/bitops.h | 3 ++- > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/microblaze/include/asm/bitops.h > b/arch/microblaze/include/asm/bitops.h index e8c835f..eafa2b5 100644 > --- a/arch/microblaze/include/asm/bitops.h > +++ b/arch/microblaze/include/asm/bitops.h > @@ -319,7 +319,8 @@ extern __inline__ int ext2_test_bit(int nr, const > volatile void * addr) #define ext2_find_first_zero_bit(addr, size) \ > ext2_find_next_zero_bit((addr), (size), 0) > > -extern __inline__ unsigned long ext2_find_next_zero_bit(void *addr, > unsigned long size, unsigned long offset) +static inline unsigned long > ext2_find_next_zero_bit(void *addr, > + unsigned long size, unsigned long offset) > { > unsigned long *p = ((unsigned long *) addr) + (offset >> 5); > unsigned long result = offset & ~31UL; I'd rather see it done the other way -- drop the inline and let compiler decide. What are the size penalties ? Best regards, Marek Vasut