[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZJGooPbZQq6G2BjI@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 16:24:48 +0300
From: 'Andy Shevchenko' <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] pktcdvd: Use clamp_val() instead of min()+max()
On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 12:06:49PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
...
> > + *hi = clamp_val(*hi, 500, 1000000);
>
> (standard rant about minmax.h)
>
> clamp_val() is pretty much broken by design.
> It MIGHT be ok here but it casts both limits to the
> type of the value being compared.
> In general that is just plain wrong.
>
> Like min_t() it is generally ok because the kernel only uses
> unsigned values between 0 and MAXINT.
>
> If min/max were ok, then using clamp() should also be ok.
Submit a patch to fix it, if you think you can make it better.
Obviously your comment can be addressed separately if we even
need that.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists