Re: [-mm patch] init/main.c: dummy mark_rodata_ro() should be static
From: Andrew Morton (akpm_at_osdl.org)
Date: 11/24/05
- Previous message: Adrian Bunk: "Re: [-mm patch] init/main.c: dummy mark_rodata_ro() should be static"
- In reply to: Dave Jones: "Re: [-mm patch] init/main.c: dummy mark_rodata_ro() should be static"
- Next in thread: Adrian Bunk: "[-mm patch] dummy mark_rodata_ro() should be static"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 21:05:14 -0800 To: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 11:54:40PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 02:46:51PM -0800, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> > > On Wed, 23 Nov 2005, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > >
> > > > Every inline dummy function should be static.
> > >
> > > Please explain why it matters in this case.
> >
> > We don't need an additional global copy of the function.
>
> it's an empty body, surely the compiler will compile it away ?
>
With
inline void foo(void)
{
}
The compiler has to put an out-of-line copy of foo() into this .o file in
case some other .o file calls it.
-
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/
- Previous message: Adrian Bunk: "Re: [-mm patch] init/main.c: dummy mark_rodata_ro() should be static"
- In reply to: Dave Jones: "Re: [-mm patch] init/main.c: dummy mark_rodata_ro() should be static"
- Next in thread: Adrian Bunk: "[-mm patch] dummy mark_rodata_ro() should be static"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
