Il 21/08/2014 14:50, Radim Krčmář ha scritto:
> > >
> > > All empty arch functions are in '.c' files, so it seems better to follow
> > > the same path.
> > > (And have one refactoring patch if GCC does not optimize this.)
> >
> > GCC certainly does not optimize this (unless you use LTO).
>
> I see LTO patches in next ... do we want to move every empty arch
> function into headers?
I wouldn't reject the patches.
(It would also save some lines of code, since in the headers it's common
to do "static inline void foo(void) {}" on a single line).
> (It is probably going to take LTO few years to be enabled by default.)
Indeed... see also
http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/608945/7763ad2aee106f1d/ from today's LWN
issue.
Paolo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
