[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANn89iKqeiiA_-1otsWj8=fLc9s4LPgrN9RNsh7iBkuGDaf3cQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2026 16:39:59 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Nicolas Pitre <npitre@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] compiler_types: Introduce inline_for_performance
On Sun, Jan 18, 2026 at 4:32 PM Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de> wrote:
>
> Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com> wrote:
> > -#ifdef CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_PERFORMANCE
> > -static __always_inline
> > -#else
> > -static inline
> > -#endif
> > +static inline_for_performance
>
> ..
>
> > -#ifdef CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_PERFORMANCE
> > -static __always_inline
> > -#else
> > -static inline
> > -#endif
> > +static inline_for_performance
>
> ..
>
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_PERFORMANCE
> > +#define inline_for_performance __always_inline
> > +#else
> > +#define inline_for_performance
> > +#endif
>
> Should that read
>
> #else
> +#define inline_for_performance inline
>
> instead?
Damn, of course !
Powered by blists - more mailing lists