From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263626AbUHaXyQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:54:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S269334AbUHaXrr (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:47:47 -0400 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:37767 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S269291AbUHaXgE (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:36:04 -0400 Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:39:14 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: ncunningham@linuxmail.org Cc: bunk@fs.tum.de, ak@muc.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] kill __always_inline Message-Id: <20040831163914.4c7c543c.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <1093993946.8943.33.camel@laptop.cunninghams> References: <20040831221348.GW3466@fs.tum.de> <20040831153649.7f8a1197.akpm@osdl.org> <20040831225244.GY3466@fs.tum.de> <1093993946.8943.33.camel@laptop.cunninghams> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.7 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i586-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > Hi. > > On Wed, 2004-09-01 at 08:52, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 03:36:49PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > > > > > > An issue that we already discussed at 2.6.8-rc2-mm2 times: > > > > > > > > 2.6.9-rc1 includes __always_inline which was formerly in -mm. > > > > __always_inline doesn't make any sense: > > > > > > > > __always_inline is _exactly_ the same as __inline__, __inline and inline . > > > > > > > > > > > > The patch below removes __always_inline again: > > > > > > But what happens if we later change `inline' so that it doesn't do > > > the `always inline' thing? > > > > > > An explicit usage of __always_inline is semantically different than > > > boring old `inline'. > > Excuse me if I'm being ignorant, but I thought always_inline was > introduced because with some recent versions of gcc, inline wasn't doing > the job (suspend2, which requires a working inline, was broken by it for > example). IIRC, the compiler was generating out-of-line versions of functions in every compilation unit whcih included the header file. When we the developers just wanted `inline' to mean `inline, dammit'. If that broke swsusp in some manner then the relevant swsusp functions should be marked always_inline, because they have some special needs. > That is to say, doesn't the definition of always_inline vary > with the compiler version? If the compiler supports attribute((always_inline)) then the kernel build system will use that. If the compiler doesn't support attribute((always_inline)) then we just emit `inline' from cpp and hope that it works out.