On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 2:58 PM, Detlef Riekenberg wine.dev@web.de wrote:
Code, which is called very often, should produce as less overhead as possible. I suggest to use "static inline".
I have 'static' already. The compiler's probably better at deciding when to use inline than we are, may as well leave inline off unless we're sure it's faster. (inline can cause bloat...) I haven't done the benchmarking to test whether this change slows, say, an ls -lR down, but I suspect any slowdown will be because of the extra syscall rather than the lack of inline.
Seperate implementations for fd and fname should also make a difference.
I had that originally, but it seemed duplicative. Samba seems to have similar unified helpers, so I went with that idea.
Your code handle different parameter for the attr functions. Is it possible, that code, which is compiled for one ABI version can call the implementation of the other ABI version?
Not sure I follow. Can you rephrase that?
When Wine depends on libattr and libattr-dev after you Patch, all packagers should get this information.
It shouldn't; modern glibc handles the attr functions. The libattr checks are only for old distros. - Dan