Re: [PATCH 3/5] AF_RXRPC: Make it possible to merely try to cancel timers and delayed work [try #2]

From: David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 14:22:09 +0000

Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

+static inline int try_to_cancel_delayed_work(struct delayed_work *work)
+{
+ int ret;

This expands to a fair bit of code and IMHO isn't an inline candidate.

Then why is cancel_delayed_work() inline? It's very similar in terms of
expansion.

And it's not a fair bit of code. try_to_cancel_delayed_work() is out of line,
and work_release() is just clear_bit() in disguise.

David
-
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/

References:
- Re: [PATCH 3/5] AF_RXRPC: Make it possible to merely try to cancel timers and delayed work [try #2]
  - From: Alan Cox
- [PATCH 0/5] [RFC] AF_RXRPC socket family implementation [try #2]
  - From: David Howells
- [PATCH 3/5] AF_RXRPC: Make it possible to merely try to cancel timers and delayed work [try #2]
  - From: David Howells

Prev by Date: Re: Summary of resource management discussion
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 0/5] [RFC] AF_RXRPC socket family implementation [try #2]
Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 3/5] AF_RXRPC: Make it possible to merely try to cancel timers and delayed work [try #2]
Next by thread: [PATCH 4/5] AF_RXRPC: Key facility changes for AF_RXRPC [try #2]
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread