linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 4/9] cpufreq: governor: Drop __gov_queue

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 8 Sep 2015 07:30:44 +0530
From:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc:	linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	preeti.lkml@...il.com, open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 4/9] cpufreq: governor: Drop __gov_queue_work()

On 08-09-15, 03:15, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, July 27, 2015 05:58:09 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > __gov_queue_work() isn't required anymore and can be merged with
> > gov_queue_work(). Do it.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
> 
> Quite frankly I don't see the point.

But isn't that just an unnecessary wrapper ?

> I'd even remove the inline from its definition and let the compiler decide
> what to do with it.

What if the compiler decides to link it? Why add a function call for
(almost) no use?

-- 
viresh
--
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/