lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jan]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] ring_buffer: fix ring_buffer_event_length()

    * Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:

    > On Wed, 7 Jan 2009, Andrew Morton wrote:
    >
    > > On Wed, 7 Jan 2009 23:58:39 -0500 (EST) Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
    > >
    > > > kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c | 8 +++++++-
    > >
    > > <looks>
    > >
    > > heavens, what a lot of inlining. Looks like something from 1997 :)
    > >
    > > Prove me wrong!
    >
    > I'm working on it ;-)

    i really think that inlines in .c code are uninteresting. They are
    basically inserted randomly when a function starts out 'looking simple' -
    then are forgotten about when the function grows a bit.

    They have some very mild documentation value ('look, this function is
    supposed to be simple'), but otherwise it just increases review noise. And
    latest GCC seems pretty ambivalent to their presence - so they dont help
    nor hurt in any direction.

    So i think we can afford to enter the year 2009 and can stop bothering
    about [.c file] inlines ;-)

    [ The only interesting inlines are the __always_inline instances - that's
    where we _must_ have inlining for some subtle reason. But those should
    almost never be used in .c code. ]

    Ingo


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-01-08 15:49    [W:0.026 / U:61.244 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site