From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas@vondra.me>
cc: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>,
        Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>,
        Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: s/pg_attribute_always_inline/pg_always_inline/?
In-reply-to: <3184af6f-75a2-4b43-8223-897b71970fef@vondra.me>
References: <bqqdehahpoa36igpictuqyn2s2mexk3t3ehidh2ffd2slb35e5@rzgksuiszgbg>
 <56def459-2b95-42bc-b4e4-26e57f08b064@eisentraut.org>
 <ovpakrvg3mfwyumhkrxjgnwfb75jo534booip7pqrq7cjt4orj@vydvdlbscnx4>
 <CAH2-WznHSUJcV47OhoisvABjN2xjVOYh0_bRagUE6ir5zGJzow@mail.gmail.com>
 <adee40b0-ee0d-40a8-abe7-61784db3ec6c@vondra.me>
 <CAH2-Wzm3ev6uGsf4QddpaZamzsb3ATvanggEHxnhRSkdd52bnA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4370bec0-df13-40f3-92ee-75974182e41f@vondra.me>
 <CAApHDvpwjsxBYEsLLj5Z==zqZK4JZn2S_uc0Pi3dGACSsgOQyw@mail.gmail.com>
 <2391698.1783556089@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <3184af6f-75a2-4b43-8223-897b71970fef@vondra.me>
Comments: In-reply-to Tomas Vondra <tomas@vondra.me>
	message dated "Fri, 10 Jul 2026 02:05:43 +0200"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <2811066.1783642452.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2026 20:14:12 -0400
Message-ID: <2811067.1783642452@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2811067.1783642452%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Tomas Vondra <tomas@vondra.me> writes:
> Does "backpatching the new macro" mean we'd also adjust all existing
> places to use the new macro or not? I mean, we could backpatch just the
> bit in c.h. I plan to adjust the places, to minimize possible conflicts
> when backpatching other stuff.

I think it'd be sufficient to add the new macro to the old branches.
The point of back-patching at all, I think, is to save ourselves
work if we have to back-patch some new code that uses the new style.

			regards, tom lane