On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 07:24:37AM -0700, Greg Rose wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-05-18 at 21:27 -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Ben Pfaff <[email protected]>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/internals/contributing/coding-style.rst | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/internals/contributing/coding-style.rst 
> > b/Documentation/internals/contributing/coding-style.rst
> > index 4694b2363775..666e887b1b68 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/internals/contributing/coding-style.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/internals/contributing/coding-style.rst
> > @@ -210,7 +210,7 @@ accept and ignore a null pointer argument. Code that 
> > calls such a function
> >  null-pointer check. We find that this usually makes code easier to read.
> >  
> >  Functions in ``.c`` files should not normally be marked ``inline``, 
> > because it
> > -does not usually help code generation and it does suppress compilers 
> > warnings
> > +does not usually help code generation and it does suppress compiler 
> > warnings
> >  about unused functions. (Functions defined in .h usually should be marked
> >  inline.)
> >  
> 
> Acked-by: Greg Rose <[email protected]>

Thanks Greg!  I applied this to master.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev

Reply via email to