Re: [PATCH] smiapp: re-use clamp_t instead of min(..., max(...))

Sakari Ailus
2013-07-24T15:56:13Z

On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 06:49:24PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 6:45 PM, Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@iki.fi> wrote:
>
> []
>
> >> + max_m = clamp_t(u32, max_m, sensor->limits[SMIAPP_LIMIT_SCALER_M_MIN],
> >> + sensor->limits[SMIAPP_LIMIT_SCALER_M_MAX]);
> >
> > Do you need clamp_t()? Wouldn't plain clamp() do?
>
> The *_t variants are preferred due to they are faster (no type checking).
>
> > I can change it if you're ok with that.
>
> I don't know why you may choose clamp instead of clamp_t here. Are you
> going to change variable types?

Probably not. But clamp() would serve as a sanity check vs. clamp_t() which
just does the thing. I'd prefer clamp() --- the compiler will not spend much
time on it anyway.

--
Cheers,

Sakari Ailus
e-mail: sakari.ailus@iki.fi XMPP: sailus@retiisi.org.uk