Re: Fix unlock_buffer() to work the same way as bit_unlock()

On Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 03:49:08PM -0800, Chen, Kenneth W wrote:
> Is gcc smart enough to turn constant argument and collapse inline of
> inline function?  I hope it does.

Yes, I'm pretty sure at -O2 (normal kernel usage) it is.

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

---

• References:
  • RE: Fix unlock_buffer() to work the same way as bit_unlock()
    • From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
  • RE: Fix unlock_buffer() to work the same way as bit_unlock()
    • From: "Chen, Kenneth W" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: RE: Fix unlock_buffer() to work the same way as bit_unlock()
• Next by Date: RE: Fix unlock_buffer() to work the same way as bit_unlock()
• Previous by thread: RE: Fix unlock_buffer() to work the same way as bit_unlock()
• Next by thread: RE: Fix unlock_buffer() to work the same way as bit_unlock()
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]