Ok, I've made a testcompile and the resulting image size is similar so
the patch is good.
Acked-by: Mikael Starvik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
/Mikael
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adrian Bunk
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 1:55 AM
To: Mikael
Ok, I've made a testcompile and the resulting image size is similar so
the patch is good.
Acked-by: Mikael Starvik [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/Mikael
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adrian Bunk
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 1:55 AM
To: Mikael
At the time this is rejected because GCC 3.2 makes other inlining
descisions when "extern inline" is used instead of "static inline".
Actually we modified lots of static inline to extern inline in
2.4 in November 2002 to reduce code bloat with GCC 3.2. I don't
know if this still is true with 4.0.
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 07:08:30AM +0200, Mikael Starvik wrote:
> At the time this is rejected because GCC 3.2 makes other inlining
> descisions when "extern inline" is used instead of "static inline".
> Actually we modified lots of static inline to extern inline in
> 2.4 in November 2002 to
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 07:08:30AM +0200, Mikael Starvik wrote:
At the time this is rejected because GCC 3.2 makes other inlining
descisions when extern inline is used instead of static inline.
Actually we modified lots of static inline to extern inline in
2.4 in November 2002 to reduce code
At the time this is rejected because GCC 3.2 makes other inlining
descisions when extern inline is used instead of static inline.
Actually we modified lots of static inline to extern inline in
2.4 in November 2002 to reduce code bloat with GCC 3.2. I don't
know if this still is true with 4.0.
If
6 matches
Mail list logo