Re: [PATCH -v7][RFC]: mutex: implement adaptive spinning

[Linus Torvalds]

On Fri, 9 Jan 2009, Harvey Harrison wrote:
> 
> __needs_inline?  That would imply that it's for correctness reasons.

.. but the point is, we have _thousands_ of inlines, and do you know which 
is which? We've historically forced them to be inlined, and every time 
somebody does that "OPTIMIZE_INLINE=y", something simply _breaks_.

So instead of just continually hitting our head against this wall because 
some people seem to be convinced that gcc can do a good job, just do it 
the other way around. Make the new one be "inline_hint" (no underscores 
needed, btw), and there is ansolutely ZERO confusion about what it means. 

At that point, everybody knows why it's there, and it's clearly not a 
correctness issue or anything else.

Of course, at that point you might as well argue that the thing should not 
exist at all, and that such a flag should just be removed entirely. Which 
I certainly agree with - I think the only flag we need is "inline", and I 
think it should mean what it damn well says.

		Linus
--
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/