netdev - Re: [PATCH 3/4] [XFRM]: Kill some bloat

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-Id: <20080105.231658.168081302.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Sat, 05 Jan 2008 23:16:58 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au
Cc:	ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi, netdev@...r.kernel.org, acme@...hat.com,
	paul.moore@...com, latten@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] [XFRM]: Kill some bloat

From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 11:29:35 +1100

> We should never use inline except when it's on the fast path and this
> is definitely not a fast path.  If a function ends up being called
> just once the compiler will most likely inline it anyway, making the
> use of the keyword inline redundant.

Similarly I question just about any inline usage at all in *.c files
these days.

I even would discourage it's use for fast-path cases as well.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html