Hi Jeroen, (sorry for the near-duplicate, and see question at end)
On Sat, 05 Jul 2014 13:36:47 +0200, Jeroen Hofstee <jer...@myspectrum.nl> wrote: > Hello Albert, > > On za, 2014-07-05 at 11:13 +0200, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > > Hi Jeroen, > > > > On Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:10:39 +0200, Jeroen Hofstee > > <jer...@myspectrum.nl> wrote: > > > > > When compiling u-boot with W=1 the extern inline void for > > > read* is likely causing the most noise. gcc / clang will > > > warn there is never a actual declaration for these functions. > > > Instead of declaring these extern make them static inline so > > > it is actually declared. > > > > > > cc: Albert ARIBAUD <albert.u.b...@aribaud.net> > > > Signed-off-by: Jeroen Hofstee <jer...@myspectrum.nl> > > > --- > > > > Ok, so the obvious question: what makes you decide to switch to 'static > > inline' rather than provide the extern versions that 'extern static' > > calls for? > > Assuming your question is, why didn't you just add the prototypes instead? It was more along the lines of "were you aware that you had a choice there?" > Well if we wanted to be brave gnu99 citizens we should provide the > prototypes, the extern inline version and a separated definition in > case the compiler fails / is not in the mood to inline the function. > This quite fragile / some housekeeping. Furthermore it is gnu specific > and likely fails with gcc -std=c99 as well. > > Making them static inline there is always a single definition and it > is up to the compiler to either inline it or make it a static function > by it self. Since we were already relying on the compiler to inline > it (at least I am unaware that there are non inline version around), > this boils down to the same thing, but without warnings. > > And... I can likely drop this one as well[1], although I haven't > checked yet. linux does the same btw for __LINUX_ARM_ARCH__ >= 6. > > I can check binary size if that something you wonder about... As I said, I have no stance on whether 'static inline' or 'extern inline' was better / more appropriate / other (please specify). I just wanted to make sure that you had considered both possibilities before choosing one of them. I am now assured that you have, so all is fine. > Regards, > Jeroen > > [1] > https://github.com/jhofstee/u-boot/commit/5cd261fecc5397bf5abef82f6a781d8b04992654 Which board do you get warnings for? Amicalement, -- Albert. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
