Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list netdev); Mon, 21 Jul 2003 08:06:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ginger.cmf.nrl.navy.mil (ginger.cmf.nrl.navy.mil [134.207.10.161])
	by oss.sgi.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with SMTP id h6LF66Fl015062
	for <netdev@oss.sgi.com>; Mon, 21 Jul 2003 08:06:07 -0700
Received: from locutus.cmf.nrl.navy.mil (locutus.cmf.nrl.navy.mil [134.207.10.66])
	by ginger.cmf.nrl.navy.mil (8.12.7/8.12.7) with ESMTP id h6LF63sG012139;
	Mon, 21 Jul 2003 11:06:03 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200307211506.h6LF63sG012139@ginger.cmf.nrl.navy.mil>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
cc: netdev@oss.sgi.com
Reply-To: chas3@users.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH][ATM] minor cleanups for 2.5 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 21 Jul 2003 05:24:16 PDT."
             <20030721052416.3ef97f3b.davem@redhat.com> 
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 11:03:30 -0400
From: chas williams <chas@cmf.nrl.navy.mil>
X-Spam-Score: () hits=-0.9
X-Virus-Scanned: NAI Completed
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.30 (www . roaringpenguin . com / mimedefang)
X-archive-position: 4208
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com
Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com
X-original-sender: chas@cmf.nrl.navy.mil
Precedence: bulk
X-list: netdev

In message <20030721052416.3ef97f3b.davem@redhat.com>,"David S. Miller" writes:
>> (and how does __inline__ work
>> when its the timer function?)
>
>If you take the address of a function marked inline,
>gcc outputs a non-inline of the function.

i figured that.  tagging this function inline is essentially
pointless.  (which was sort of my point in a roundabout way)