Re: [PATCH v2 3/2] lib/uuid.c: Silence an unchecked return value warning

["George Spelvin" <linux@sciencehorizons.net>]

>From andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com Sun Jun 05 14:19:48 2016
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,421,1459839600"; 
   d="scan'208";a="995605979"
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/2] lib/uuid.c: Silence an unchecked return value
 warning
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: George Spelvin <linux@sciencehorizons.net>
Cc: bjorn@mork.no, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, matt@codeblueprint.co.uk, 
	rv@rasmusvillemoes.dk
Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2016 17:21:04 +0300
In-Reply-To: <20160604131622.28377.qmail@ns.sciencehorizons.net>
References: <20160604131622.28377.qmail@ns.sciencehorizons.net>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.20.2-2 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Andy Shevchenko worte:
> On Sat, 2016-06-04 at 09:16 -0400, George Spelvin wrote:
> Which I against of. Please, use normal hex_to_bin() calls here.
> 
> Compiler will inline it anyway, but at least will not do second check
> for nothing.

Um... huh?  Neither hex_to_bin() nor hex2bin() are inline functions.
They're declared as extern in <linux/kernel.h> and defined in
lib/hexdump.c.

One call is smaller than two calls, which is why I did that.

It's also faster, as hex_to_bin() *is* inlined within hex2bin()
(if you compile with -O).

Is your request based on a false premise?