From: Brian Foster on gitlab.com https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/1603#note_891470421 Can you elaborate? Do you mean that you prefer the ifdef because it makes finding this code easier? Wouldn't we have to scan for callsites anyways given that the empty inlines already exist (and seem to be used without ifdefs in most cases where the call itself is the primary RHEL difference), or that the kernel configs might differ? I suppose I can see the value in that, but ISTM that a better approach might be to lose the inlines and enforce that calls are wrapped in the ifdef. Otherwise when new calls are added, this sort of relies on developers either missing the inline defs and/or using an ifdef pattern that would probably be considered bad practice upstream. In any event, I don't have a strong opinion on this, just trying to provide comprehensive feedback. I'll ack this version and let Alice decide if she's good with it or wanted to send another version. _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list -- kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
