From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.10]) (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 DBB54312819 for ; Tue, 2 Jun 2026 18:03:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.10 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1780423384; cv=none; b=GmMLbfXsmoV9i6avWjvITSXqlUci9Zx+nc0W7mj4+WFOjunto36BPNe2lbV3XzjeYI5PKW1loy+uc422OBMPe/jkMWUGMIZbIZ2tb6RiuXo2kyJvUZLT2OdwLgENkEQf8ZCId3WM3VZEvHgTQ7UigHBNZTa7QBnSwqoFcc98Qds= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1780423384; c=relaxed/simple; bh=GcZiwbYrSRnJ2tibG/3xjN+wVFaZ+VeUCoDEOyNODfY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=TiH8VgsiQe9nXkqjt+TSLEIOG2ZK3tk9kVjBd/YXAUrIViCkQbUhiSppnq7j/8tB79myC4S16xnDq9S1PuzRssGP796XNczV/htAE50qfMSFF1cWizKbP6tBUT+Bm2dpM9u1mjnTmZee+1H39VjJIJxlpTkvIS6b/cJY7Fc745k= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=n2MYiPQX; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.10 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="n2MYiPQX" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1780423383; x=1811959383; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=GcZiwbYrSRnJ2tibG/3xjN+wVFaZ+VeUCoDEOyNODfY=; b=n2MYiPQXJOEuadqOh4is90lIZnRogotilB+G/gGDSLBfEpaweGDiD6Fu NqfjXFm+NVQsDWEihNf+F2uu60ZxTqekIw3Nqad72NOdsSg/8zkc5RiBB U03wxSyfueCLwN2y5X+snB+/WTkzfX7sbPZHHQnuASapfE7icjNCOUJ5a mDZr1yjuv1aTlGRokv7aN1blqS6yhxB+Ea++6iG2/a/pW2ZDpEfme9n02 QclMlbfRAApvKBTCuNTOaugmbfrEa+Q3QcPX0ddYi9EQlQvIzdioY7A4N Zyj38eO66NPeQUjVzvIfIAggMp0Bi2xY6DHpbfyEeLwvMJiVQb3nmek1Q g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: M2WdTbXERAqAuYxxFU3svQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: MFqBKhw5R5aawauY4miiqg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11805"; a="92599659" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.24,183,1774335600"; d="scan'208";a="92599659" Received: from fmviesa008.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.148]) by fmvoesa104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 02 Jun 2026 11:03:02 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: KeWRZsJ2RO+73K7S0N/U9g== X-CSE-MsgGUID: VfKKDqhlRtmTs3WVMyghVw== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.24,183,1774335600"; d="scan'208";a="241494053" Received: from mkosciow-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.245.245.229]) by fmviesa008-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 02 Jun 2026 11:03:00 -0700 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2026 21:02:58 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Petr Mladek Cc: Thorsten Blum , Steven Rostedt , Rasmus Villemoes , Sergey Senozhatsky , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/vsprintf: replace min_t/max_t with min/max Message-ID: References: <20260518123145.79411-3-thorsten.blum@linux.dev> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - c/o Alberga Business Park, 6 krs, Bertel Jungin Aukio 5, 02600 Espoo On Thu, May 21, 2026 at 03:49:12PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote: > On Mon 2026-05-18 14:31:47, Thorsten Blum wrote: > > Use the simpler min()/max() macros since the values are all compatible. ... > > if (spec.field_width > 0) > > - len = min_t(int, spec.field_width, 64); > > + len = min(spec.field_width, 64); > > Honestly, I do not see any big advantage in replacing the macros. > In fact, the min()/max() macros are even more complex because > they check compatibility of the compared types. > > IMHO, this adds non-necessary churn into the git history without > an obvious advantage. The advantage I see is to give a good example to others to avoid min_t() whenever is possible. I am not insisting to include this patch, just share my 2 cents. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko