On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 01:17:00PM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> No, I am aware of those. The problem is they aren't accessed as
> function pointers. As such converting them to static inline functions
> is easy. As I am sure you are aware an "inline" function doesn't
> normally generate a function pointer.
I think Keith's original idea of defining them to NULL is right. That
takes care of all the current trivial assign to struct cases.
If someone wants to call these functions they'll still need the ifdef
around the call as those won't otherwise compile, but they probably
want the ifdef around the whole caller anyway.