Re: kernel-2.2.1-undefined references.

Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
Fri, 5 Feb 1999 13:21:51 +0000 (GMT)


> I never understood why Linux uses "extern inline"... gcc never guaranteed
> that it would always inline everything just because of the magic keyword.

It does work however. And if you sized a kernel before and after with old
gcc's at least the extern one was a clear winner.

> NB, the "static inline" solution may mean that, for example, both
> tcp_input.o and tcp_output.o might have explicit code for skb_push() or
> whatever, but as these functions usually are quite small and (since they're
> declared static) they don't bite each other, IMHO that's not a problem.

At this point egcs really needs to invent a new "common inline" of some sort.
There are kernel cases where you need to force inlining and where you don't
want duplicated code all over the place caused by compiler weaknesses.

Granted talk is cheap, Im not an egcs hacker.

Alan

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/