Re: [PATCH -v7][RFC]: mutex: implement adaptive spinning

[Harvey Harrison]

On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 22:34 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> The naming problem remains though:
> 
> - Perhaps we could introduce a name for the first category: __must_inline? 
>   __should_inline? Not because it wouldnt mean 'always', but because it is 
>   'always inline' for another reason than the correctless __always_inline.
> 
> - Another possible approach wuld be to rename the second category to 
>   __force_inline. That would signal it rather forcefully that the inlining 
>   there is an absolute correctness issue.

__needs_inline?  That would imply that it's for correctness reasons.

Then __always_inline is left to mean that it doesn't _need_ to be inline
but we _want_ it inline regardless of what gcc thinks?

$0.02

Harvey

--
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/