[ofa-general] Re: [PATCH][TRIVIAL] opensm/osm_port_profile: No need to inline some functions

[Sasha Khapyorsky]

On 07:01 Mon 23 Jun     , Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> 
> 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.

I asked in order to understand about are there any specific reasons for
this patch or just it is "nice to have" stuff (and not to mark my
disagreement).

> Are the inlines really needed in these two cases ?

Inlining is potential optimization and as you said it is optional, so
word "needed" is not the best which describes this :)

I likely fine about the first case (especially about
osm_port_prof_set_ignored_port()), but the second function really looks
as "one-line stuff" for me.

> In general, I think OpenSM needs a more careful look as to what really
> needs inlining.

Sure. Agreed here.

> > Would be nice to not mix in one patch.
> 
> Already done on list.

Thanks.

Sasha