On 10/23/2017 3:31 PM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
Please, no "inline-function" in *.c files as it is written in CodingStyle.
Sure about that?
I'm not style-nazi, so won't insist, but this is in CodingStyle.
Documentation/process/coding-style.rst
841 15) The inline disease
842 ----------------------
843
844 There appears to be a common misperception that gcc has a magic "make me
845 faster" speedup option called ``inline``. While the use of inlines can be
846 appropriate (for example as a means of replacing macros, see Chapter 12), it
847 very often is not. Abundant use of the inline keyword leads to a much bigger
848 kernel, which in turn slows the system as a whole down, due to a bigger
849 icache footprint for the CPU and simply because there is less memory
850 available for the pagecache. Just think about it; a pagecache miss causes a
851 disk seek, which easily takes 5 milliseconds. There are a LOT of cpu cycles
852 that can go into these 5 milliseconds.
Right, which doesn't say not to put it in a .c file. So I think the
location is OK for this. However, whether it even needs to be an inline
function at all in the first place is certainly a valid question. Let me
chat with Sebastian and double check, if it doesn't really need to be
inlined we'll send a v2.
-Denny
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
