Re: Status of CONFIG_FORCED_INLINING?

[Arjan van de Ven]

Rob Landley wrote:
> I notice that feature-removal-schedule.txt has CONFIG_FORCED_INLINING 
> scheduled to go away most of a year ago.  My question is what replaces it:
>
> Does #define inline __always_inline become the new standard and uses of 
> __always_inline be removed, or should all instances of "inline" either be 
> removed or replaced with __always_inline?  (Or are there going to be two 
> keywords meaning exactly the same thing going forward?)

it should be that we do not force gcc to inline on the "normal" inline 
keyword, and we mark the cases that HAVE to be inlined for correctness 
reasons as __always_inline.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/