Hi Sasha, On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 16:39 +0300, Sasha Khapyorsky wrote: > Hi Hal, > > On 08:18 Wed 18 Jun , Hal Rosenstock wrote: > > pensm/osm_port_profile: No need to inline osm_port_prof_is_ignored_port > > and osm_port_prof_set_ignored_port functions > > What is the reason for doing this (and the next inline removing patch)?
Inlining is only a hint to the compiler and given the over(ab)use of inline in OpenSM (by my count almost 500 instances) I doubt this has the intended effect. Are the inlines really needed in these two cases ? In general, I think OpenSM needs a more careful look as to what really needs inlining. > > Also, some cosmetic formatting changes > > Would be nice to not mix in one patch. Already done on list. -- Hal > Sasha _______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
