From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@samsung.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 13:13:27 +0200
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 1/3] misc:pmic:core New generic PMIC driver
In-Reply-To: <4E8D7982.4070403@denx.de>
References: <1314868412-2949-1-git-send-email-l.majewski@samsung.com>
	<1317707151-21803-1-git-send-email-l.majewski@samsung.com>
	<1317707151-21803-2-git-send-email-l.majewski@samsung.com>
	<4E8D7982.4070403@denx.de>
Message-ID: <20111006131327.72af23d8@lmajewski.digital.local>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

Hi Stefano,

I suppose you are talking about cases like the following:

> #define CONFIG_SPI_FLASH_CS		(1 | 121 << 8)

Yes, this construct will cause range overflow.

> +struct p_spi {
> +	unsigned char cs;
> +	unsigned char mode;
> +	unsigned char bitlen;

Therefore the above variables need to be at least unsigned shorts.
As you proposed they shall be unsigned int.

On technical question:
Shall I prepare the whole v3 patch series or only v3 for this single
patch ([PATCH v2 1/3] misc:pmic:core New generic PMIC drive)?

What would be easier for You or Wolfgang to pick?


-- 
Best regards,

Lukasz Majewski

Samsung Poland R&D Center
Platform Group