[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f35da51a-d45a-4be2-81c3-4da25b65c928@web.de>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 10:34:59 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Carlos Maiolino <cem@...nel.org>, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Chandan Babu R <chandanbabu@...nel.org>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Qasim Ijaz <qasdev00@...il.com>, Natalie Vock <natalie.vock@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: Simplify maximum determination in
xrep_calc_ag_resblks()
…
>> +++ b/fs/xfs/scrub/repair.c
>> @@ -382,7 +382,7 @@ xrep_calc_ag_resblks(
>> refcbt_sz);
>> xfs_perag_put(pag);
>>
>> - return max(max(bnobt_sz, inobt_sz), max(rmapbt_sz, refcbt_sz));
>> + return max3(bnobt_sz, inobt_sz, max(rmapbt_sz, refcbt_sz));
>
> I have nothing against the patch itself, but honestly I don't see how it
> improves anything. It boils down to nesting comparison instructions too, and
> doesn't make the code more clear IMHO.
> So, unless somebody else has a stronger reason to have this change, NAK from my side.
Would you be looking for a wrapper call variant like max4()?
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists