Re: [announce] new tree: "fix all build warnings, on all configs"

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Tuesday, 21 of October 2008, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 01:17:16PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > * Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > > >   *	acpi_pm_disable_gpes - Disable the GPEs.
> > > >   */
> > > > -static int acpi_pm_disable_gpes(void)
> > > > +static inline int acpi_pm_disable_gpes(void)
> > > 
> > > Just to satisfy my curiosity, what compiler warning does marking 
> > > functions inline fix?
> > 
> > the commit log below explains the situation. The warning exposed a maze 
> > of #ifdefs in drivers/acpi/sleep/main.c. It's not the warning we need to 
> > "fix" but that maze, obviously.
> 
> Thanks. That makes sense, 
> 
> I also agree with you that the better alternative would be 
> to just always force SUSPEND together with ACPI.
> 
> I suspect the code delta wouldn't be very large compared to the rest
> of the ACPI code.

Is that _really_ necessary?

I mean, do the warnings appear in any case that's not theoretically impossible?

Rafael
--
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/