Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 19 Mar 2014 10:19:29 +0800 | From | Dongsheng Yang <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/3] sched: Use clamp() and clamp_val() to make it more readable. |
| |
On 03/19/2014 10:16 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 18:26:44 +0800 > Dongsheng Yang <yangds.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> 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> >> --- >> kernel/sched/core.c | 11 ++--------- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c >> index 259ab85..85f4231 100644 >> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c >> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c >> @@ -3068,17 +3068,10 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE1(nice, int, increment) >> * We don't have to worry. Conceptually one call occurs first >> * and we have a single winner. >> */ >> - if (increment < -NICE_WIDTH) >> - increment = -NICE_WIDTH; >> - if (increment > NICE_WIDTH) >> - increment = NICE_WIDTH; >> - > Patch 2 and 3 need to be merged into a single patch.
Okey, I will squash them into one.
Thanx > > -- Steve > >> + increment = clamp(increment, -NICE_WIDTH, NICE_WIDTH); >> nice = task_nice(current) + increment; >> - if (nice < MIN_NICE) >> - nice = MIN_NICE; >> - if (nice > MAX_NICE) >> - nice = MAX_NICE; >> >> + nice = clamp_val(nice, MIN_NICE, MAX_NICE); >> if (increment < 0 && !can_nice(current, nice)) >> return -EPERM; >> >
| |