Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 08 Dec 2003 09:50:30 -0800 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: const versus __attribute__((const)) |
| |
Arnd Bergmann wrote: > H. Peter Anvin writes: > >>I have made a patch against the current tree defining >>__attribute_const__ in <linux/compiler.h> and using it in the above >>cases; does anyone know any reason why I should *NOT* submit this to >>Linus? > > > I noticed before that gcc appearantly ignores __attribute__((const)) > for inline functions, so both the original and your proposed code > is rather pointless as an optimization, except for extern declarations. > > I'd rather remove the 'const' completely where it causes warnings for > inline functions. >
These functions are available to userspace, though, and can be compiled with -O0; thus not inlined.
-hpa
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |