From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from perceval.ideasonboard.com (perceval.ideasonboard.com [213.167.242.64]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0813352949; Thu, 22 Jan 2026 01:49:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.167.242.64 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769046598; cv=none; b=LuOGYrQAOVvqytp3+eyafrHK32bu3ZA8AOEIJGqaFwl/744ZPPONOZYFQ5kl/7elr0PlrnDUvOcN78vw3CmcpOmy/IttXe+3LI+VnmLZfXms+aACixqCYH0gPuLQAyRcIES/+y8pkLZQm88cDraGLMHDtE566DmPAfqZnLTmrBw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769046598; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Ja7V76ohRL3wBsMJQTfP53ib4Fj0mdTSoof+L5zm4dM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Eb6g5ptF0E8ohSVDAdN8Liw7moGnB1Elgc8R1GnqY3SBnOxe4DqS7wrjVpr7HWMI4r7KXLpKpbcg3qQjkfaZfY0WRsvO7Em1lP122IYHzCAz2drWrRKfNTk7TQ7+WZ4ttosG9nGsWGSkEi5bspz9e774frmZ/hlQfu+69TVlIHY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=ideasonboard.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ideasonboard.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ideasonboard.com header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.b=mUCihPtd; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.167.242.64 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=ideasonboard.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ideasonboard.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ideasonboard.com header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.b="mUCihPtd" Received: from pendragon.ideasonboard.com (2001-14ba-703d-e500--ff4.rev.dnainternet.fi [IPv6:2001:14ba:703d:e500::ff4]) by perceval.ideasonboard.com (Postfix) with UTF8SMTPSA id 470BD2DD; Thu, 22 Jan 2026 02:49:21 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ideasonboard.com; s=mail; t=1769046561; bh=Ja7V76ohRL3wBsMJQTfP53ib4Fj0mdTSoof+L5zm4dM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=mUCihPtd462XckreDMDpZXBLa49Y1+S2+XNStwY+AZ02CkqfZ2/oiizzoc0OA9ENt lpBxQXpHDCSdsp3IO2YcAPxIa52FFIjiP0yUM7JKptCj8MTn/yi0noELZQOpANIFTj 6SIW6419x76JuZ3mYyf1yGOBXdwIJC5Lcabr4NMA= Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2026 03:49:52 +0200 From: Laurent Pinchart To: Ricardo Ribalda Cc: Hans de Goede , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Johannes Berg , Laurent Pinchart , linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] media: uvcvideo: use min() for npacket calculation Message-ID: <20260122014952.GC183118@killaraus> References: <20260114-uvc-alloc-urb-v1-0-cedf3fb66711@chromium.org> <20260114-uvc-alloc-urb-v1-3-cedf3fb66711@chromium.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-media@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260114-uvc-alloc-urb-v1-3-cedf3fb66711@chromium.org> Hi Ricardo, Thank you for the patch. On Wed, Jan 14, 2026 at 10:32:15AM +0000, Ricardo Ribalda wrote: > Make the code slightly more appealing by making use of min(). There > shall not be any functional change from this patch. > > Signed-off-by: Ricardo Ribalda > --- > drivers/media/usb/uvc/uvc_video.c | 4 +--- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/media/usb/uvc/uvc_video.c b/drivers/media/usb/uvc/uvc_video.c > index 59eb95a4b70c05b1a12986e908b7e9979b064fd0..db02080f15772e0bc1d5cfcadd32463f4e6ea045 100644 > --- a/drivers/media/usb/uvc/uvc_video.c > +++ b/drivers/media/usb/uvc/uvc_video.c > @@ -1808,9 +1808,7 @@ static int uvc_alloc_urb_buffers(struct uvc_streaming *stream, > * Compute the number of packets. Bulk endpoints might transfer UVC > * payloads across multiple URBs. > */ > - npackets = DIV_ROUND_UP(size, psize); > - if (npackets > UVC_MAX_PACKETS) > - npackets = UVC_MAX_PACKETS; > + npackets = min(UVC_MAX_PACKETS, DIV_ROUND_UP(size, psize)); Do you think this improves readability ? I find the existing code easier to read, its purpose is immediately clear: it computes npackets and clamps it to a max value. With min() I have to pause and think. I'll take patches 1/3 and 2/3 in my tree already as 1/3 fixes an issue. > > /* Retry allocations until one succeed. */ > for (; npackets > 0; npackets /= 2) { -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart