From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de>,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] kernel: add clamp(), clamp_t() and clamp_val() macros
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 22:08:56 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080311220856.82e45072.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1205269894.22317.32.camel@brick>
On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 14:11:34 -0700 Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com> wrote:
> Adds macros similar to min/max/min_t/max_t.
>
> Also, change the variable names used in the min/max macros to
> avoid shadowed variable warnings when min/max min_t/max_t are
> nested.
>
> clamp_val is useful when clamping to constants so all types are
> taken from typeof() the first arg.
>
> Small formatting changes to make all the macros have a similar
> form.
>
> Signed-off-by: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com>
> ---
> Andrew, this is a rollup of my original patch already in -mm with
> checkpatch warnings fixed up and one additional macro based on
> limit_value found in the b43 driver, called clamp_val.
Well, this is why I dislike replacement patches. You don't know what
changed, and the replacement patch can fail to incproporate fixes from
third parties.
> include/linux/kernel.h | 66 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> 1 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
And so it did. You lost my patch which removes the clamp() implementation
from v4l. Instead it seems that you put it into [2/6]. Which means that
this patch on its own will break the build, thus screwing up life for
git-bisect users.
Please don't screw up git-bisect users' lives.
> clamp_t is no longer used, but I introduce it anyway as some future
> user may want to force the return type similar to how min_t/max_t
> operate.
eh, just nuke it.
> 1.5.4.4.592.g32d4c
Is all this new infrastructure actually used? We seem to be adding more
complexity than we're taking away.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-12 5:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-11 21:11 [PATCH 1/6] kernel: add clamp(), clamp_t() and clamp_val() macros Harvey Harrison
2008-03-12 5:08 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2008-03-12 15:13 ` Michael Buesch
2008-03-12 16:54 ` Harvey Harrison
2008-03-12 17:20 ` Michael Buesch
2008-03-12 17:34 ` Harvey Harrison
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080311220856.82e45072.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=bzolnier@gmail.com \
--cc=harvey.harrison@gmail.com \
--cc=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mb@bu3sch.de \
--cc=mchehab@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox