Matt Mackall wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 12:54:17PM +0400, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>> Matt Mackall wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 06:20:43PM +0400, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>>>> Just make the __pid_nr() etc functions that expect the argument
>>>> to always be not NULL.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>> static inline pid_t pid_nr(struct pid *pid)
>>>> {
>>>> pid_t nr = 0;
>>>> if (pid)
>>>> - nr = pid->numbers[0].nr;
>>>> + nr = __pid_nr(pid);
>>>> return nr;
>>>> }
>>> Is there a patch that removes these inlines? Otherwise this looks good
>>> to me.
>> Not yet. Some of are uninlined already, but others are not. I'd like
>> to make some testing before uninline them.
>
> I was asking about the whole function, actually, not the keyword. Is
> this function not equivalent to __pid_nr now?
Oh, I see. I haven't managed to check the whole kernel yet that all
the users of pid_xnr() calls pass not-null pointer there. This is
in TODO list.
Thanks,
Pavel
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
