On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> With the current implementation in the kernel (and considering that
> CONFIG_FORCED_INLINING was implemented in a way that it never had
> any effect), __always_inline and inline are currently equivalent.
yes, that option was implemented in a half-assed sort of way. if you
look at compiler-gcc4.h, at first glance the preprocessing looks like
it's doing the right thing for that config option:
==================================
#include <linux/compiler-gcc.h>
#ifdef CONFIG_FORCED_INLINING
# undef inline
# undef __inline__
# undef __inline
# define inline inline __attribute__((always_inline))
# define __inline__ __inline__ __attribute__((always_inline))
# define __inline __inline __attribute__((always_inline))
#endif
==================================
but it's too late for checking that kernel config option, since
compiler-gcc.h has already been included, which includes:
==================================
#define inline inline __attribute__((always_inline))
#define __inline__ __inline__ __attribute__((always_inline))
#define __inline __inline __attribute__((always_inline))
==================================
so, as you say, "__always_inline and inline are currently equivalent".
which is sort of confusing and might come as a nasty surprise to some
developers who weren't expecting that.
rday
-
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]
