Re: [PATCH] cleanup ACPI numa warnings

[Alex Williamson]

On Sun, 2004-08-08 at 14:36 -0700, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Aug 2004 10:57:29 -0700 Paul Jackson wrote:
> 
> | > And there's nothing in CodingStyle that agrees with you that I could find.
> | 
> | >From the file Documentation/SubmittingPatches:
> | 
> |         3) 'static inline' is better than a macro
> |
> Oops.  Thanks, Paul.

   Ok, I was all set to switch to static inlines, but it doesn't work.
Compiling w/ debug on, _dbg is undefined, which is part of the
ACPI_DB_INFO macro, but it only gets setup by the ACPI_FUNCTION_NAME
macro.  Guess I got lucky by choosing to do it as a macro.  IMHO, it
doesn't really make sense to make the static inline functions more
complicated or hide where they're getting called to make this all work.
So, I think the choices are to stick with the ugly macros or put #ifdefs
around the code and essentially leave it the way it is.  Sorry I didn't
give it a more thorough look when originally questioned.  Better ideas?
Thanks,

	Alex

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