Re: [announce] new tree: "fix all build warnings, on all configs"
From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Date: Tue Oct 21 2008 - 15:35:14 EST
On Tuesday, 21 of October 2008, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 01:17:16PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > * acpi_pm_disable_gpes - Disable the GPEs.
> > > > */
> > > > -static int acpi_pm_disable_gpes(void)
> > > > +static inline int acpi_pm_disable_gpes(void)
> > >
> > > Just to satisfy my curiosity, what compiler warning does marking
> > > functions inline fix?
> > the commit log below explains the situation. The warning exposed a maze
> > of #ifdefs in drivers/acpi/sleep/main.c. It's not the warning we need to
> > "fix" but that maze, obviously.
> Thanks. That makes sense,
> I also agree with you that the better alternative would be
> to just always force SUSPEND together with ACPI.
> I suspect the code delta wouldn't be very large compared to the rest
> of the ACPI code.
Is that _really_ necessary?
I mean, do the warnings appear in any case that's not theoretically impossible?
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/