Re: [PATCH] syscall latency improvement #1

From: Pavel Machek (pavel@suse.cz)
Date: Tue Jan 29 2002 - 07:54:08 EST

Next message: Pavel Machek: "Re: 2.4.18pre4aa1"
Previous message: Jeff Garzik: "Re: crc32 and lib.a (was Re: [PATCH] nbd in 2.5.3 does not"
In reply to: Andrew Morton: "Re: [PATCH] syscall latency improvement #1"
Next in thread: Alan Cox: "Re: [PATCH] syscall latency improvement #1"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Hi!

> The first patch should be against Documentation/CodingStyle.
> What are we trying to achieve here? What are the guidelines
> for when-to and when-to-not? I'd say:
>
> - If a function has a single call site and is static then it
> is always correct to inline.

Yep, but gcc should figure this out itself. No point helping it.

Pavel

-- Philips Velo 1: 1"x4"x8", 300gram, 60, 12MB, 40bogomips, linux, mutt, details at http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/velo/index.html.

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Pavel Machek: "Re: 2.4.18pre4aa1"
Previous message: Jeff Garzik: "Re: crc32 and lib.a (was Re: [PATCH] nbd in 2.5.3 does not"
In reply to: Andrew Morton: "Re: [PATCH] syscall latency improvement #1"
Next in thread: Alan Cox: "Re: [PATCH] syscall latency improvement #1"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 31 2002 - 21:01:38 EST