On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 07:17:18PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 6:23 PM Andy Shevchenko > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 06:09:53PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 5:37 PM Andy Shevchenko > > > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 05:23:07PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 7:57 PM Andy Shevchenko > > > > > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > ... > > > > > > > Well, what about using min() and max() here? > > > > > > > > I devoted one paragraph in the commit message to answer this. The kernel.h > > > > (which I'm planning to split at some point) is a monster which brings more pain > > > > than solves here. Note, this is a header file and it's quite clean from > > > > dependencies perspective. > > > > > > But this is code duplication (even if really small) and it is not > > > entirely clean too. > > > > > > Maybe move the definitions of min() and max() to a separate header file? > > > > That is the plan in the kernel.h splitting project. But do you want me to do it > > here? I can try to bring that patch into this series. > > Well, ostensibly the purpose of this series is to reduce code > duplication, but if it adds code duplication, that kind of defeats the > purpose IMO. Okay, I will append minmax.h split in v2. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
