Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1764021AbXESR2k (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 May 2007 13:28:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1762441AbXESR23 (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 May 2007 13:28:29 -0400 Received: from static-71-162-243-5.phlapa.fios.verizon.net ([71.162.243.5]:40597 "EHLO grelber.thyrsus.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1763899AbXESR22 (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 May 2007 13:28:28 -0400 From: Rob Landley To: Jan Engelhardt Subject: Re: [PATCH] LogFS take three Date: Sat, 19 May 2007 13:26:30 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 Cc: Andrew Morton , =?iso-8859-1?q?J=F6rn_Engel?= , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Albert Cahalan , Thomas Gleixner , Evgeniy Polyakov , Pekka Enberg , Greg KH , Ingo Oeser References: <20070515151919.GA32510@lazybastard.org> <200705190215.36334.rob@landley.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200705191326.31932.rob@landley.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1554 Lines: 38 On Saturday 19 May 2007 5:24 am, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > On May 19 2007 02:15, Rob Landley wrote: > >> > + > >> > +static inline struct logfs_inode *LOGFS_INODE(struct inode *inode) > >> > +{ > >> > + return container_of(inode, struct logfs_inode, vfs_inode); > >> > +} > >> > >> Do these need to be uppercase? > > > >I'm trying to keep it clear in my head... > > > >When do you need to say __always_inline and when can you get away with > >just saying "static inline"? > > When using "static inline", the compiler may ignore the inline keyword > (it's just a hint), and leave the function as a standalone function. > > When CONFIG_FORCED_INLINING is active, and it is by default, inline is > always substituted by __always_inline, to be on the safe side. Some code > needs to be always inline; but not all code has been checked whether it > is safe to go from __always_inline to inline. I've seen patches go by using __always_inline directly. Is there some janitorial effort to examine each instance of the the inline keyword and either replace it with "__always_inline" or remove it? Right now "inline" seems to be about as useful as the "register" keyword. You don't feed hints to a compiler like gcc, you hit it with a two-by-four and thumbscrews if you want to get its' attention. Rob - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/