On Wed, Jul 16, 2025 at 02:54:05PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > From: George Hu <integral@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Refactor the xfs_max_open_zones() function by replacing the usage of > min() and max() macro with clamp() to simplify the code and improve > readability. > > Signed-off-by: George Hu <integral@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Reviewed-by: John Garry <john.g.garry@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > fs/xfs/xfs_zone_alloc.c | 4 +--- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_zone_alloc.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_zone_alloc.c > index 729d80ff52c1..d9e2b1411434 100644 > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_zone_alloc.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_zone_alloc.c > @@ -1133,9 +1133,7 @@ xfs_max_open_zones( > /* > * Cap the max open limit to 1/4 of available space > */ > - max_open = min(max_open, mp->m_sb.sb_rgcount / 4); > - > - return max(XFS_MIN_OPEN_ZONES, max_open); > + return clamp(max_open, XFS_MIN_OPEN_ZONES, mp->m_sb.sb_rgcount / 4); Does clamp() handle the case where @max < @min properly? I'm worried about shenanigans on a runt 7-zone drive, though I can't remember off the top of my head if we actually prohibit that... --D > } > > /* > -- > 2.47.2 > >
