Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 5 Mar 2014 10:26:58 -0500 | From | Steven Rostedt <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/3] sched: Use clamp() and clamp_val() to make it more readable. |
| |
On Wed, 05 Mar 2014 07:17:36 -0800 Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-03-05 at 20:36 +0800, Dongsheng Yang wrote: > > As Kees suggested, I use clamp() function to replace the if and > > else branch, making it more readable and modular. > > > > Suggested-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> > > Signed-off-by: Dongsheng Yang <yangds.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> > [] > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c > [] > > @@ -3070,17 +3070,10 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE1(nice, int, increment) > > * We don't have to worry. Conceptually one call occurs first > > * and we have a single winner. > > */ > > - if (increment < -40) > > - increment = -40; > > - if (increment > 40) > > - increment = 40; > > - > > + increment = clamp(increment, -40, 40); > > Maybe: > > increment = clamp(increment, -(NICE_MAX - NICE_MIN + 1), > , NICE_MAX - NICE_MIN + 1)
Ug, that's much harder to read.
> > or add yet another define like #define NICE_RANGE > or #define NICE_MAX_INCREMENT
Sure, if there's a NICE_MAX_INC == 40, then we could do:
increment = clamp(increment, -NICE_MAX_INC, NICE_MAX_INC);
-- Steve
| |