Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 12:42:47 -0600 Eric Sandeen <[email protected]> wrote:
>> So here's the first stab at fixing it. I'm sure there are style points
>> to be hashed out. Putting all the functions as static inlines in a header
>> was just to avoid hundreds of lines of simple function declarations before
>> we get to the meat of bad_inode.c, but it's probably technically wrong to
>> put it in a header. Also if putting a copyright on that trivial header file
>> is going overboard, just let me know. Or if anyone has a less verbose
>> but still correct way to address this problem, I'm all ears.
>
> Since the only uses of these functions is to take their addresses, the
> inline gains you nothing
Hm, yes of course... my fingers just automatically type "static inline"
in header files I guess. :)
> and since the only uses are in the one file, you
> should just define them in that file.
Ok, will do. That seems to be the consensus.
Thanks,
-Eric
-
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/
[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]
