[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0901091734260.6528@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 17:39:18 -0800 (PST)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
cc: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
Peter Morreale <pmorreale@...ell.com>,
Sven Dietrich <SDietrich@...ell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v7][RFC]: mutex: implement adaptive spinning
On Sat, 10 Jan 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> - 'static inline' functions in .c files that are not used cause no build
> warnings - while if we change them to 'static', we get a 'defined but
> not used' warning. Hundreds of new warnings in the allyesconfig builds.
Well, duh. Maybe they shouldn't be marked "inline", and maybe they should
be marked with "__maybe_unused" instead.
I do not think it makes sense to use "inline" as a way to say "maybe I
won't use this function".
Yes, it's true that "static inline" won't warn, but hey, as a way to avoid
a warning it's a pretty bad one.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists