Re: [PATCH net] docs: netdev: Document guidance on inline functions

[Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>]

Hi Simon,

Another nit:

On 2/3/25 5:59 AM, Simon Horman wrote:
> Document preference for non inline functions in .c files.
> This has been the preference for as long as I can recall
> and I was recently surprised to discover that it is undocumented.
> 
> Reported-by: Alexandre Ferrieux <alexandre.ferrieux@gmail.com>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/9662e6fe-cc91-4258-aba1-ab5b016a041a@orange.com/
> Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
> ---
>  Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst | 11 +++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst
> index e497729525d5..1fbb8178b8cd 100644
> --- a/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst
> @@ -408,6 +408,17 @@ at a greater cost than the value of such clean-ups.
>  
>  Conversely, spelling and grammar fixes are not discouraged.
>  
> +Inline functions
> +----------------
> +
> +The use of static inline functions in .c file is strongly discouraged
> +unless there is a demonstrable reason for them, usually performance
> +related. Rather, it is preferred to omit the inline keyword and allow the
> +compiler to inline them as it sees fit.
> +
> +This is a stricter requirement than that of the general Linux Kernel
> +:ref:`Coding Style<codingstyle>`

Is there an ending period (full stop) after that sentence?
Could/should there be?

Thanks.

> +
>  Resending after review
>  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>  
> 
> 

-- 
~Randy