[PATCH] netio.sys: Remove WINAPI on static functions where not needed.

[Ken Thomases]

On Jun 29, 2020, at 11:00 AM, Paul Gofman <pgofman at codeweavers.com> wrote:
> 
> On 6/29/20 18:51, Francois Gouget wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Francois Gouget <fgouget at free.fr>
>> ---
>> dlls/netio.sys/netio.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/dlls/netio.sys/netio.c b/dlls/netio.sys/netio.c
>> index 53d74f994db..fe73b06b978 100644
>> --- a/dlls/netio.sys/netio.c
>> +++ b/dlls/netio.sys/netio.c
>> @@ -605,7 +605,7 @@ static void WINAPI send_receive_callback(TP_CALLBACK_INSTANCE *instance, void *s
>>     unlock_socket(socket);
>> }
>> 
>> -static NTSTATUS WINAPI do_send_receive(WSK_SOCKET *socket, WSK_BUF *wsk_buf, ULONG flags, IRP *irp, BOOL is_send)
>> +static NTSTATUS do_send_receive(WSK_SOCKET *socket, WSK_BUF *wsk_buf, ULONG flags, IRP *irp, BOOL is_send)
>> {
>>     struct wsk_socket_internal *s = wsk_socket_internal_from_wsk_socket(socket);
>>     struct wsk_pending_io *io;
> 
> I don't think it matters much, but is it really an improvement? If we
> call a single helper function from WINAPI function, which in turn calls
> just WINAPI functions, isn't it cleaner to keep the same calling ABI to
> potentially reduce the number of register saves?

For a static function, the compiler can choose a non-standard ABI for the function call, to potentially completely avoid register spill.  I don't know if it does or not, but an explicit calling convention could prevent such optimizations.  Best to let the compiler choose.

-Ken