lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Feb]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [ 01/10] [Suspend2] kernel/power/modules.h
    Date
    Hi.

    On Thursday 02 February 2006 22:48, Pekka J Enberg wrote:
    > On Wednesday 01 February 2006 23:01, Pekka Enberg wrote:
    > > > > +
    > > > > +static inline void suspend_initialise_module_lists(void) {
    > > > > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&suspend_filters);
    > > > > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&suspend_writers);
    > > > > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&suspend_modules);
    > > > > +}
    > > >
    > > > I couldn't find a user for this. I would imagine there's only one,
    > > > though, and this should be inlined there?
    >
    > On Thu, 2 Feb 2006, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
    > > I forgot to mention re this - yes, there's just one caller, in another
    > > set of patches I'll send later (this was just the first set!). Having the
    > > function to be inlined in this .h so that it's with other module specific
    > > code, and then used in the caller once it has been #included, isn't that
    > > the right way to do things?
    >
    > Sorry, I can't parse the above :-). My point was that this is
    > probably called in a .c file so move the function in that file and
    > introduce it whenever you introduce the caller.

    I understand that. However if I do it, I separate the routine from the code it
    logically belongs with. On the other hand, I do no harm by leaving it in the
    header. We don't end up with multiple copies of the routine.

    Regards,

    Nigel
    --
    See our web page for Howtos, FAQs, the Wiki and mailing list info.
    http://www.suspend2.net IRC: #suspend2 on Freenode
    [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2006-02-02 22:33    [W:0.023 / U:30.224 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site