From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Martyn Welch <martyn@welchs.me.uk>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>,
Trivial Patch Monkey <trivial@kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Manohar Vanga <manohar.vanga@gmail.com>,
Egor Uleyskiy <egor.ulieiskii@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers: staging: vme: Changed (1 << n) to BIT(n)
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 15:28:45 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151124232845.GC17422@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEccXefJK9PE73B2njX-on0RWKZbiOk-ARwJe8V1xLHP1i0FAQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 08:03:18AM +0000, Martyn Welch wrote:
>
> On 8 Nov 2015 23:22, "Andy Shevchenko" <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 10:39 PM, Egor Uleyskiy <egor.ulieiskii@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > From: Egor Uleyskiy <egor.ulieiskii@gmail.com>
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Egor Uleyskiy <egor.ulieiskii@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/staging/vme/devices/vme_pio2.h | 93
> ++++++++++++++++------------------
> > > 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/vme/devices/vme_pio2.h b/drivers/staging/vme/
> devices/vme_pio2.h
> > > index d5d94c4..29d7a58 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/staging/vme/devices/vme_pio2.h
> > > +++ b/drivers/staging/vme/devices/vme_pio2.h
>
> <snip>
>
> > > @@ -182,7 +181,7 @@ static const int PIO2_CNTR_CTRL[6] = {
> PIO2_REGS_CTRL_WRD0,
> > > PIO2_REGS_CTRL_WRD1 };
> > >
> > > #define PIO2_CNTR_SC_DEV0 0
> > > -#define PIO2_CNTR_SC_DEV1 (1 << 6)
> > > +#define PIO2_CNTR_SC_DEV1 BIT(6)
> > > #define PIO2_CNTR_SC_DEV2 (2 << 6)
> > > #define PIO2_CNTR_SC_RDBACK (3 << 6)
> >
> > With the first parts which are an excellent clean up, this one makes
> > two styles out of one.
> > Greg, what would you suggest to do? For my opinion in such cases
> > direct values or previous syntax looks better.
> >
>
> If BIT() can't be applied uniformly, I'm afraid I don't see the value in using
> it.
>
> Has there been some general push to use BIT(x) rather than (1 << x) that I've
> missed?
>
> I'm not sure how I feel about these macros, is there some advantage that I'm
> missing?
It's easier to understand for the most part, so yes, it is good to do
where it makes sense (hint, not for this last chunk...)
thanks,
greg k-h
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-24 23:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-08 20:39 [PATCH] drivers: staging: vme: Changed (1 << n) to BIT(n) Egor Uleyskiy
2015-11-08 21:43 ` Andy Shevchenko
2015-11-24 23:28 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
[not found] ` <CAEccXefJK9PE73B2njX-on0RWKZbiOk-ARwJe8V1xLHP1i0FAQ@mail.gmail.com>
2015-11-24 23:28 ` Greg KH [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20151124232845.GC17422@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=andy.shevchenko@gmail.com \
--cc=egor.ulieiskii@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=manohar.vanga@gmail.com \
--cc=martyn@welchs.me.uk \
--cc=trivial@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.