[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160222091350.GA8471@eudyptula.hq.kempniu.pl>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 10:13:50 +0100
From: Michał Kępień <kernel@...pniu.pl>
To: Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@...il.com>
Cc: Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
Darek Stojaczyk <darek.stojaczyk@...il.com>,
platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] dell-wmi: enable receiving WMI events on Dell
Vostro V131
> > > Pali's point about documenting the hardcoded values and eliminating the code
> > > duplication with a function (inline) is a good one.
> >
> > I plan to only put a comment next to 0x51534554 as 0x10000 is apparently
> > just something pulled out of a hat (as the link provided in the commit
> > message proves) and input[3] should be self-explanatory due to the name
> > of the variable whose value is put into it.
>
> Maybe you can add documentation which we got from Dell on some ML about
> this SMI call. Similarly what I added in dell-laptop.c...
Sure, I can do that.
> > By the way, is there any kernel-wide or subsystem-wide policy for
> > marking a function inline? I mean, this is hardly time-critical code,
> > so is your suggestion to make it inline just a preference or am I
> > unaware of some rule?
>
> IIRC recent versions of gcc ignores "inline" keyword and inline
> functions as needed when doing optimizations.
This was my hunch as well, but I couldn't find any proof immediately,
hence the question.
--
Best regards,
Michał Kępień
Powered by blists - more mailing lists