All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: "siddhant gupta(siddhant1223)" <siddhantgupta416@gmail.com>
Cc: devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, matthias.bgg@gmail.com,
	mamatashukla555@gmail.com, himadrispandya@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: mt7621-dma: Prefer Using BIT Macro instead of left shifting on 1.
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 20:40:55 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201102194055.GA2429929@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201102193402.GA14965@Sleakybeast>

On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 01:04:02AM +0530, siddhant gupta(siddhant1223) wrote:
> 
> Replace left shifting on 1 by a BIT macro to fix checkpatch warning.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Siddhant Gupta <siddhantgupta416@gmail.com>
> 
> ---
>  drivers/staging/mt7621-dma/mtk-hsdma.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/mt7621-dma/mtk-hsdma.c b/drivers/staging/mt7621-dma/mtk-hsdma.c
> index 354536783e1c..a9e1a1b14035 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/mt7621-dma/mtk-hsdma.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/mt7621-dma/mtk-hsdma.c
> @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@
>  #define HSDMA_GLO_TX_DMA		BIT(0)
>  
>  #define HSDMA_BT_SIZE_16BYTES		(0 << HSDMA_GLO_BT_SHIFT)
> -#define HSDMA_BT_SIZE_32BYTES		(1 << HSDMA_GLO_BT_SHIFT)
> +#define HSDMA_BT_SIZE_32BYTES		BIT(HSDMA_GLO_BT_SHIFT)
>  #define HSDMA_BT_SIZE_64BYTES		(2 << HSDMA_GLO_BT_SHIFT)
>  #define HSDMA_BT_SIZE_128BYTES		(3 << HSDMA_GLO_BT_SHIFT)

In looking at the code, does this change really make sense?

(hint, I don't think so...)

_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: "siddhant gupta(siddhant1223)" <siddhantgupta416@gmail.com>
Cc: devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, matthias.bgg@gmail.com,
	mamatashukla555@gmail.com, himadrispandya@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: mt7621-dma: Prefer Using BIT Macro instead of left shifting on 1.
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 20:40:55 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201102194055.GA2429929@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201102193402.GA14965@Sleakybeast>

On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 01:04:02AM +0530, siddhant gupta(siddhant1223) wrote:
> 
> Replace left shifting on 1 by a BIT macro to fix checkpatch warning.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Siddhant Gupta <siddhantgupta416@gmail.com>
> 
> ---
>  drivers/staging/mt7621-dma/mtk-hsdma.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/mt7621-dma/mtk-hsdma.c b/drivers/staging/mt7621-dma/mtk-hsdma.c
> index 354536783e1c..a9e1a1b14035 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/mt7621-dma/mtk-hsdma.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/mt7621-dma/mtk-hsdma.c
> @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@
>  #define HSDMA_GLO_TX_DMA		BIT(0)
>  
>  #define HSDMA_BT_SIZE_16BYTES		(0 << HSDMA_GLO_BT_SHIFT)
> -#define HSDMA_BT_SIZE_32BYTES		(1 << HSDMA_GLO_BT_SHIFT)
> +#define HSDMA_BT_SIZE_32BYTES		BIT(HSDMA_GLO_BT_SHIFT)
>  #define HSDMA_BT_SIZE_64BYTES		(2 << HSDMA_GLO_BT_SHIFT)
>  #define HSDMA_BT_SIZE_128BYTES		(3 << HSDMA_GLO_BT_SHIFT)

In looking at the code, does this change really make sense?

(hint, I don't think so...)

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: "siddhant gupta(siddhant1223)" <siddhantgupta416@gmail.com>
Cc: matthias.bgg@gmail.com, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,
	mamatashukla555@gmail.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	himadrispandya@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: mt7621-dma: Prefer Using BIT Macro instead of left shifting on 1.
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 20:40:55 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201102194055.GA2429929@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201102193402.GA14965@Sleakybeast>

On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 01:04:02AM +0530, siddhant gupta(siddhant1223) wrote:
> 
> Replace left shifting on 1 by a BIT macro to fix checkpatch warning.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Siddhant Gupta <siddhantgupta416@gmail.com>
> 
> ---
>  drivers/staging/mt7621-dma/mtk-hsdma.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/mt7621-dma/mtk-hsdma.c b/drivers/staging/mt7621-dma/mtk-hsdma.c
> index 354536783e1c..a9e1a1b14035 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/mt7621-dma/mtk-hsdma.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/mt7621-dma/mtk-hsdma.c
> @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@
>  #define HSDMA_GLO_TX_DMA		BIT(0)
>  
>  #define HSDMA_BT_SIZE_16BYTES		(0 << HSDMA_GLO_BT_SHIFT)
> -#define HSDMA_BT_SIZE_32BYTES		(1 << HSDMA_GLO_BT_SHIFT)
> +#define HSDMA_BT_SIZE_32BYTES		BIT(HSDMA_GLO_BT_SHIFT)
>  #define HSDMA_BT_SIZE_64BYTES		(2 << HSDMA_GLO_BT_SHIFT)
>  #define HSDMA_BT_SIZE_128BYTES		(3 << HSDMA_GLO_BT_SHIFT)

In looking at the code, does this change really make sense?

(hint, I don't think so...)

  reply	other threads:[~2020-11-02 19:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-11-02 19:34 [PATCH] staging: mt7621-dma: Prefer Using BIT Macro instead of left shifting on 1 siddhant gupta(siddhant1223)
2020-11-02 19:34 ` siddhant gupta(siddhant1223)
2020-11-02 19:34 ` siddhant gupta(siddhant1223)
2020-11-02 19:40 ` Greg KH [this message]
2020-11-02 19:40   ` Greg KH
2020-11-02 19:40   ` Greg KH
2020-11-03  4:40   ` siddhant gupta
2020-11-03  4:40     ` siddhant gupta
2020-11-03  4:40     ` siddhant gupta

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=20201102194055.GA2429929@kroah.com \
    --to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=devel@driverdev.osuosl.org \
    --cc=himadrispandya@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=mamatashukla555@gmail.com \
    --cc=matthias.bgg@gmail.com \
    --cc=siddhantgupta416@gmail.com \
    /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.