On Wed, 9 Jan 2013 08:59:07 -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote: > SENSORS_LIMIT and the generic clamp_val have the same functionality, > and clamp_val is more efficient. > > This patch reduces text size by 9052 bytes and bss size by 11624 bytes > for x86_64 builds.
Wow, I like it a lot! Well done! > > Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <[email protected]> Acked-by: Jean Delvare <[email protected]> Just one thing: > (...) > diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/lm93.c b/drivers/hwmon/lm93.c > index 1a003f7..81449a2 100644 > --- a/drivers/hwmon/lm93.c > +++ b/drivers/hwmon/lm93.c > @@ -371,22 +371,22 @@ static unsigned LM93_IN_FROM_REG(int nr, u8 reg) > static u8 LM93_IN_TO_REG(int nr, unsigned val) > { > /* range limit */ > - const long mV = SENSORS_LIMIT(val, > - lm93_vin_val_min[nr], lm93_vin_val_max[nr]); > + const long mv = clamp_val(val, > + lm93_vin_val_min[nr], lm93_vin_val_max[nr]); > > /* try not to lose too much precision here */ > - const long uV = mV * 1000; > - const long uV_max = lm93_vin_val_max[nr] * 1000; > - const long uV_min = lm93_vin_val_min[nr] * 1000; > + const long uv = mv * 1000; > + const long uv_max = lm93_vin_val_max[nr] * 1000; > + const long uv_min = lm93_vin_val_min[nr] * 1000; > > /* convert */ > - const long slope = (uV_max - uV_min) / > + const long slope = (uv_max - uv_min) / > (lm93_vin_reg_max[nr] - lm93_vin_reg_min[nr]); > - const long intercept = uV_min - slope * lm93_vin_reg_min[nr]; > + const long intercept = uv_min - slope * lm93_vin_reg_min[nr]; > > - u8 result = ((uV - intercept + (slope/2)) / slope); > - result = SENSORS_LIMIT(result, > - lm93_vin_reg_min[nr], lm93_vin_reg_max[nr]); > + u8 result = ((uv - intercept + (slope/2)) / slope); All these case changes in variable name seem a little off-topic here, especially for a subsystem-wide patch. > + result = clamp_val(result, > + lm93_vin_reg_min[nr], lm93_vin_reg_max[nr]); > return result; > } > > @@ -409,13 +409,13 @@ static unsigned LM93_IN_REL_FROM_REG(u8 reg, int upper, > int vid) > */ > static u8 LM93_IN_REL_TO_REG(unsigned val, int upper, int vid) > { > - long uV_offset = vid * 1000 - val * 10000; > + long uv_offset = vid * 1000 - val * 10000; > if (upper) { > - uV_offset = SENSORS_LIMIT(uV_offset, 12500, 200000); > - return (u8)((uV_offset / 12500 - 1) << 4); > + uv_offset = clamp_val(uv_offset, 12500, 200000); > + return (u8)((uv_offset / 12500 - 1) << 4); > } else { > - uV_offset = SENSORS_LIMIT(uV_offset, -400000, -25000); > - return (u8)((uV_offset / -25000 - 1) << 0); > + uv_offset = clamp_val(uv_offset, -400000, -25000); > + return (u8)((uv_offset / -25000 - 1) << 0); Same here. > } > } > (...) > @@ -2052,9 +2052,9 @@ static ssize_t store_pwm_auto_channels(struct device > *dev, > return err; > > mutex_lock(&data->update_lock); > - data->block9[nr][LM93_PWM_CTL1] = SENSORS_LIMIT(val, 0, 255); > + data->block9[nr][LM93_PWM_CTL1] = clamp_val(val, 0, 255); > lm93_write_byte(client, LM93_REG_PWM_CTL(nr, LM93_PWM_CTL1), > - data->block9[nr][LM93_PWM_CTL1]); > + data->block9[nr][LM93_PWM_CTL1]); This one, while correct, also doesn't belong here IMHO. > mutex_unlock(&data->update_lock); > return count; > } -- Jean Delvare -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe platform-driver-x86" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
