> > > Pali's point about documenting the hardcoded values and eliminating the code > > > duplication with a function (inline) is a good one. > > > > I plan to only put a comment next to 0x51534554 as 0x10000 is apparently > > just something pulled out of a hat (as the link provided in the commit > > message proves) and input[3] should be self-explanatory due to the name > > of the variable whose value is put into it. > > Maybe you can add documentation which we got from Dell on some ML about > this SMI call. Similarly what I added in dell-laptop.c... Sure, I can do that. > > By the way, is there any kernel-wide or subsystem-wide policy for > > marking a function inline? I mean, this is hardly time-critical code, > > so is your suggestion to make it inline just a preference or am I > > unaware of some rule? > > IIRC recent versions of gcc ignores "inline" keyword and inline > functions as needed when doing optimizations. This was my hunch as well, but I couldn't find any proof immediately, hence the question. -- Best regards, Michał Kępień -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe platform-driver-x86" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
