[lkml]   [2004]   [Aug]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] cleanup ACPI numa warnings
On Sun, 2004-08-08 at 14:36 -0700, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Aug 2004 10:57:29 -0700 Paul Jackson wrote:
> | > And there's nothing in CodingStyle that agrees with you that I could find.
> |
> | >From the file Documentation/SubmittingPatches:
> |
> | 3) 'static inline' is better than a macro
> |
> Oops. Thanks, Paul.

Ok, I was all set to switch to static inlines, but it doesn't work.
Compiling w/ debug on, _dbg is undefined, which is part of the
ACPI_DB_INFO macro, but it only gets setup by the ACPI_FUNCTION_NAME
macro. Guess I got lucky by choosing to do it as a macro. IMHO, it
doesn't really make sense to make the static inline functions more
complicated or hide where they're getting called to make this all work.
So, I think the choices are to stick with the ugly macros or put #ifdefs
around the code and essentially leave it the way it is. Sorry I didn't
give it a more thorough look when originally questioned. Better ideas?


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:05    [W:0.062 / U:3.436 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site