Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230612122926.107333-1-herve.codina@bootlin.com>
 <20230612122926.107333-7-herve.codina@bootlin.com> <CAHp75Vf2dmAS9VD-pgyZwVopVCFy8yFjhPWEj8sym=pfE7uxSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230613100000.6bd9e690@bootlin.com>
In-Reply-To: <20230613100000.6bd9e690@bootlin.com>
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 13 Jun 2023 20:08:08 +0300
Message-ID: <CAHp75Vcr5Owjn0HK-+D0mpPJAkAxG7F8bEO=sqvhT8w=_xnF7w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/12] minmax: Introduce {min,max}_array()
To:     Herve Codina <herve.codina@bootlin.com>
Cc:     Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.com>,
        Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com>,
        alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
        Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 11:00=E2=80=AFAM Herve Codina <herve.codina@bootlin=
.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 17:10:40 +0300
> Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 3:30=E2=80=AFPM Herve Codina <herve.codina@boot=
lin.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Introduce min_array() (resp max_array()) in order to get the
> > > minimal (resp maximum) of values present in an array.
> >
> > Some comments below, after addressing them,
> > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>

...

> > > +       typeof(array) __array =3D (array);                        \
> >
> > We have __must_be_array()
>
> Using __must_be_array() will lead to some failure.
> Indeed, we can have:
>   --- 8< ---
>   int *buff
>   ...
>   min =3D min_array(buff, nb_item);
>   --- 8< ---
>
> In this case, __must_be_array() will report that buff is not an array.

Oh, I missed that.

> To avoid any confusion, what do you think if I renamed {min,max}_array()
> to {min,max}_buffer() and replace __array by __buff and use *(__buff + xx=
x)
> instead of array[xxx] in the macro.

But functionally it's still against an array.

I would stick with "array" in the name, but add a comment why
__must_be_array() is not used. If we need a stricter variant, we may
add a new wrapper with that check. That said, I think we can use
__array[0] and similar indexed accesses.


--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko