Re: [PATCH v2 7/8] lib: move bsearch code

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 09.12.2020 15:27, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
>> On 9 Dec 2020, at 09:41, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 07/12/2020 10:23, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 24.11.2020 17:57, Julien Grall wrote:
>>>> On 24/11/2020 00:40, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>>> On a totally separate point,  I wonder if we'd be better off compiling
>>>>> with -fgnu89-inline because I can't see any case we're we'd want the C99
>>>>> inline semantics anywhere in Xen.
>>>>
>>>> This was one of my point above. It feels that if we want to use the
>>>> behavior in Xen, then it should be everywhere rather than just this helper.
>>> I'll be committing the series up to patch 6 in a minute. It remains
>>> unclear to me whether your responses on this sub-thread are meant
>>> to be an objection, or just a comment. Andrew gave his R-b despite
>>> this separate consideration, and I now also have an ack from Wei
>>> for the entire series. Please clarify.
>>
>> It still feels strange to apply to one function and not the others... But I 
>> don't have a strong objection against the idea of using C99 inlines in Xen.
>>
>> IOW, I will neither Ack nor NAck this patch.
> 
> I think as Julien here: why doing this inline thing for this function and not 
> the others
> provided by the library ?
> Could you explain the reasons for this or the use cases you expect ?
> 
> I see 2 usage of bsearch in arm code and I do not get why you are doing this 
> for
> bsearch and not for the other functions.

May I ask whether you read Andrew's quite exhaustive reply to Julien
asking about this? Apart from this, it was Andrew who had asked to
inline bsearch(), and I followed that request. The initial version
of this series didn't have any inlining of these library functions
(which, after all, also isn't the goal of the series).

Jan