[U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM:asm:io.h use static inline

[Jeroen Hofstee]

Hello Albert,

On 05-07-14 15:21, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> Hi Jeroen,
>
> (sorry for the near-duplicate, and see question at end)
>
> On Sat, 05 Jul 2014 13:36:47 +0200, Jeroen Hofstee
> <jeroen at 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
>>> <jeroen at 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.boot at aribaud.net>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jeroen Hofstee <jeroen at 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?"
yes I was aware of that.
>> 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.
ok
>> Regards,
>> Jeroen
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/jhofstee/u-boot/commit/5cd261fecc5397bf5abef82f6a781d8b04992654
> Which board do you get warnings for?
Basically any, but as the commit message says, it is just for removing
warnings when building with `make W=1` or clang (which actually errors,
without the other patch). There is no hurry in applying it. But e.g.
for the twister I am sure you will see them, with the additional warnings
enabled.

Regards,
Jeroen