* Adrian Bunk (bunk at stusta.de) wrote: > On Tue, Jul 18, 2006 at 12:00:01AM -0700, Chris Wright wrote: > >... > > --- a/mm/memory.c Fri Mar 24 04:29:46 2006 +0000 > > +++ b/mm/memory.c Fri Mar 24 04:30:48 2006 +0000 > > @@ -1358,6 +1358,100 @@ int remap_pfn_range(struct vm_area_struc > > } > > EXPORT_SYMBOL(remap_pfn_range); > > > > +static inline int apply_to_pte_range(struct mm_struct *mm, pmd_t *pmd, > > + unsigned long addr, unsigned long end, > > + pte_fn_t fn, void *data) > >... > > +static inline int apply_to_pmd_range(struct mm_struct *mm, pud_t *pud, > > + unsigned long addr, unsigned long end, > > + pte_fn_t fn, void *data) > >... > > +static inline int apply_to_pud_range(struct mm_struct *mm, pgd_t *pgd, > > + unsigned long addr, unsigned long end, > > + pte_fn_t fn, void *data) > >... > > Please avoid "inline" in C files. > > (gcc already automatically inlines static functions with only one caller.) Sure, that's fair. The surrounding similar code follows the same format as above, perhaps you plan to patch?
