netdev - Re: [PATCH net] docs: netdev: Document guidance on inline functions

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]

Message-ID: <20250204093526.GK234677@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2025 09:35:26 +0000
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Alexandre Ferrieux <alexandre.ferrieux@...il.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, workflows@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] docs: netdev: Document guidance on inline functions

On Mon, Feb 03, 2025 at 04:10:24PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> >  Conversely, spelling and grammar fixes are not discouraged.
> >  
> > +Inline functions
> > +----------------
> > +
> > +The use of static inline functions in .c file is strongly discouraged
> 
> I don't think 'static' is relevant here. They probably are static, if
> they are inline, and to avoid warnings about missing declarations. But
> we just prefer not to have any sort of inline functions without good
> justifications within a .c file.
> 
> A nit pick, so:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>

Thanks Andrew,

I agree that static is not helpful here, I'll drop that in a v2.