From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from na3sys009aog113.obsmtp.com (na3sys009aog113.obsmtp.com [74.125.149.209]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBAF8B6FC3 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2011 21:57:36 +1000 (EST) Received: by mail-bw0-f49.google.com with SMTP id 1so4855005bwz.8 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2011 04:57:31 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2011 14:57:26 +0300 From: Felipe Balbi To: Tanya Brokhman Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb:gadget: use min_t() macro instead of min() Message-ID: <20110613115723.GN3633@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> References: <1307877290-26672-1-git-send-email-tlinder@codeaurora.org> <20110613092438.GK3633@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> <03b901cc29c0$6538e970$2faabc50$@org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="prC3/KjdfqNV7evK" In-Reply-To: <03b901cc29c0$6538e970$2faabc50$@org> Cc: "'open list:FREESCALE USB PER...'" , greg@kroah.com, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, 'open list' , balbi@ti.com, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, "'open list:OMAP USB SUPPORT'" , ablay@codeaurora.org Reply-To: balbi@ti.com List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --prC3/KjdfqNV7evK Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 02:52:34PM +0300, Tanya Brokhman wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 02:14:46PM +0300, Tatyana Brokhman wrote: > > > Signed-off-by: Tatyana Brokhman > >=20 > > I need a sensible commit log for this. Why do we need to change all > > min() to min_t() ? > >=20 >=20 > Actually, Alan asked me to make this change in one place in dummy_hcd. I > wasn't aware of the min_t macro before that. So when I searched the code = for > other places I found quite a few and just thought that it would be "nicer" > to use min_t() instead of min() with casting.=20 > So we don't "need" to make this change. Everything works as is. This patch > only makes the code look nicer, nothing more. > I can elaborate the above in the commit log if you want. Yes, that's what I need. The question was supposed to be answered by the commit log ;-) --=20 balbi --prC3/KjdfqNV7evK Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJN9fsjAAoJEAv8Txj19kN1lLUH/R6eacJNptNb0Du6BBS4XTKU gd4jqe3RWib8Yhe7q395ySJM/i9IgAgAc3sfRAO+jQWQdHr54ZusbRRB9Xor+OJk uaS0dK+h2s2iDuKW5uXziVJgxeJBBGP1ehSgRErEqbB26XO3pUC5Zv5xpRVtDhv8 c/kNE/v1NhpTvoncCS7NvYMyoaamK5WCE0EKGlbhquMXI/rL7FCrG+uXXcVVinXu 8SPTYyoRiOGEgeHkaz3+qThM9RTy7dtsKfy3DOgyr7dYQ6yHLusHJ6mdja3PcJng ufEQTsLdEPZxxlrcyUvq0xnBjN2JsnY2ApmLq2oMlQBi9/fp8KCPZYd88ry8bWI= =IYJJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --prC3/KjdfqNV7evK--