Jörn,
It makes perfect sense for me to want 'direct' calls to be
inlined and be willing to accept that calls via pointers
will not be inlined.
Does this still make sense with CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE set?
Using the inline specifier may or may not make sense in this case.
I don't see what using the address-of operator has to do with things.
If CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE is set I would assume that gcc might
be given slightly different options to control the permissible
inline code expansion factor.
See sentence 1519 of www.knosof.co.uk/cbook/cbook.html for
a more detailed discussion.
--
Derek M. Jones tel: +44 (0) 1252 520 667
Knowledge Software Ltd mailto:derek@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Applications Standards Conformance Testing http://www.knosof.co.uk
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
