On 19/04/05 15:46 +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / ?$B5HF#1QL@ wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (at Tue, 19 Apr 2005 09:18:10 +0300), Denis
> Vlasenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> says:
>
> > diff -urpN 2.6.12-rc2.1.be/include/linux/bitops.h
> > 2.6.12-rc2.2.ror/include/linux/bitops.h
> > --- 2.6.12-rc2.1.be/include/linux/bitops.h Mon Apr 18 22:55:10 2005
> > +++ 2.6.12-rc2.2.ror/include/linux/bitops.h Tue Apr 19 00:25:28 2005
...
> > -static __inline__ int get_bitmask_order(unsigned int count)
> > +static inline int get_bitmask_order(unsigned int count)
> > {
> > int order;
> >
>
> Please keep using __inline__, not inline.
Why?
Couldn't find any threads about this, and even SubmittingPatches has:
"'static inline' is preferred over 'static __inline__'..."
Domen
-
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/
