lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [May]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: optimizing out inline functions
Date
Hi,

James Kosin <jkosin@beta.intcomgrp.com> writes:

> Sam Ravnborg wrote:
>> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 02:51:02PM -0500, Steve French wrote:
>>> In trying to remove some macros, I ran across another kernel style
> <<--SNIP-->>
>> With reference to a recent thread about kconfig
>> I would prefer:
>> static inline void some_debug_function(var1)
>> {
>> if (KCONFIG_DEBUG_SOMETHING) {
>> something = var1;
>> printk(some debug text);
>> }
>> }
>>
>>
>> But we do not have KCONFIG_DEBUG_SOMETHING available
>> so the second best is to use an empty function
>> to keep the typechecking in place.
>>
>> IIRC gcc optimize both away.
>
> Another way would be to have:
>
> static inline void some_debug_function(var1)
> {
> #ifdef KCONFIG_DEBUG_SOMETHING
> something = var1;
> printk(some debug text);
> #endif
> }
>
> BUT, this probably violates some styling rules.

Without indenting the ifdefs, I think this solution is the best.

It gives you the advantages of type checking but saves a superfluous
prototype.

Hannes


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-05-29 05:31    [W:0.028 / U:0.836 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site