Thomas Jansen <mithi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I have to admit that this macro produces more code than the one line > suggests. Funny thing is that no other platform complains. The new > inline warning about pisa_ipv6_copy (which is just a memcpy wrapper > IIRC) suggests that the compiler has a general problem with inlining > rather than this being a serious warning. This is why I'm asking for more details about the compiler. I'm thinking 'bout the "upper-bound" of 450 "instructions". > HASH_FIND it was an elegant solution to have no duplicate code. If we > really cannot have inline in that place, we should move the HASH_FIND > line to the two calling functions IMO. It's not worth building up a > stack frame for a hash lookup alone. I agree. -- Dipl.-Ing. Mircea Gherzan