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.
And this is exactly what warnings are all about. If the code in
question may make sense, but there is a certain likelyhood that it
does not, print a warning.
In which case the message needs to be changed to flag the function
definition that contains the inline function specifier, not the point
at which it is the operand of an address-of operator.
--
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
