From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759554AbYDQHeR (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Apr 2008 03:34:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753579AbYDQHeG (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Apr 2008 03:34:06 -0400 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.181]:65026 "EHLO wa-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752612AbYDQHeE (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Apr 2008 03:34:04 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=iEw5RDca6Mb+d0vS49kQ67V9hqUMgI50bed7OTO/21vxs0f41ut3HKjSxJ0q8dAEDkpXTxIZ+/TYwcz5R8r5fIOT36zP1VrgVcCtUqhHHZwUDoFl3aURiUJNWCaRkSCj0ojiZn/6DelsfvRr35x61BHOiQLWeiBZgJ2VZP+UIvE= Message-ID: Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 00:34:03 -0700 From: "SL Baur" To: "Andi Kleen" Subject: Re: gart: factor out common code Cc: "Pavel Machek" , "kernel list" , "Ingo Molnar" In-Reply-To: <4806EE5F.1040305@firstfloor.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080415104357.GA13441@elf.ucw.cz> <20080416081418.GA5105@elf.ucw.cz> <4806EE5F.1040305@firstfloor.org> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 8f50974aa765fe06 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 4/16/08, Andi Kleen wrote: > SL Baur wrote: > I think the casts make it more clear because the register is 32bit. > The only truly ugly bit is naming a variable "tmp". Good point. > > that function is too big to be inlined so you should probably drop the explicit > > `inline' and let the compiler decide. > In a header static inline is needed, otherwise the compiler will warn > about an unused static if it's not used which is unfortunate because > not every includer wants to use all functions. > > That said the function should probably not be in a header. Yes. Agreed. I'm happy enough having common duplicated code removed, but I know Ingo is picky about saving space whenever he can, so I thought I would point it out now before it becomes a maintenance issue. Thanks for the feedback. I'll focus harder on future reviews. -sb