From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 00:52:23 +0100
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 1/5] lib: Add wait_for_bit
In-Reply-To: <5671F48A.90606@gmail.com>
References: <1450303122-17884-1-git-send-email-mateusz.kulikowski@gmail.com>
 <201512162311.45697.marex@denx.de> <5671F48A.90606@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <201512170052.23759.marex@denx.de>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

On Thursday, December 17, 2015 at 12:32:26 AM, Mateusz Kulikowski wrote:
> Hi Marek,

Hi,

> On 16.12.2015 23:11, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > On Wednesday, December 16, 2015 at 10:58:38 PM, Mateusz Kulikowski wrote:
> [...]
> 
> >> +#include <console.h>
> >> +#include <asm/io.h>
> >> +#include <asm/errno.h>
> >> +
> >> +int wait_for_bit(const char *prefix, const u32 *reg, const u32 mask,
> >> +		 const bool set, const unsigned int timeout,
> >> +		 const bool breakable)
> >> +{
> > 
> > I wonder, what would happen if you stuffed this function into the header
> > file altogether ? I think this would allow the compiler to do
> > interprocedure optimalization on whichever file this would be included
> > into. I wonder if that would have any impact on the resulting code size.
> 
> Of course I can make it static inline.
> 
> I was suggested not to care about possible leftovers that are
> not garbage-collected by linker so didn't changed that on V2.
> 
> It's (max) few bytes that may be consumed by section alignment.

I was just curious about how much difference this would make.

Best regards,
Marek Vasut