Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 19 Dec 2018 08:28:36 -0800
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To:     Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
        Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>,
        linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/6] irqchip: sifive-plic: More flexible
 plic_irq_toggle()
Message-ID: <20181219162836.GA9224@infradead.org>
References: <20181130080207.20505-1-anup@brainfault.org>
 <20181130080207.20505-4-anup@brainfault.org>
 <20181217182719.GC7086@infradead.org>
 <CAAhSdy3i+ap2J0By3nRqK6yvb8oD4-+2QwUO9PH9GM+0odKqSA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAAhSdy3i+ap2J0By3nRqK6yvb8oD4-+2QwUO9PH9GM+0odKqSA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 02:20:10PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> Actually these functions should not be inline because plic_toggle() uses
> raw_spin_lock() and plic_irq_toggle() uses for-loop.

So?  It still inlines the all of two instances into each caller
for slightly different but related work.  Not sure it is 100% worth
it, but probably more than the one to move the calculations to init
time..