Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 09:57:20 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>
Cc: Alexey Starikovskiy <aystarik@gmail.com>, lenb@kernel.org,
       astarikovskiy@suse.de, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] acpi/battery.c: make 2 functions static
Message-ID: <20080303085720.GD15943@elte.hu>
References: <20080301161902.GN25835@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi> <47C99FE1.8080206@gmail.com> <20080301183550.GC25835@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20080301183550.GC25835@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 735
Lines: 20


* Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 09:26:41PM +0300, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
> > May I keep them inline?
> 
> The problem with such manual inlines is that we force gcc to always 
> inline them - and history has shown that functions grow without the 
> "inline" being removed.

what do you mean by "we force gcc to always inline them"? gcc is free to 
decide whether to inline or to not inline. (and CONFIG_FORCED_INLINING 
got removed from 2.6.25)

	Ingo
--
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/