All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Felix Maurer <fmaurer@redhat.com>
To: luka.gejak@linux.dev
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org,
	pabeni@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, horms@kernel.org,
	liuhangbin@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 7/7] net: hsr: use BIT() macro for bit shift constant
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2026 17:26:09 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <acVeIQ6K2ytmD5Yq@thinkpad> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260324144630.189094-8-luka.gejak@linux.dev>

On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 03:46:30PM +0100, luka.gejak@linux.dev wrote:
> From: Luka Gejak <luka.gejak@linux.dev>
>
> Replace the explicit bit shift (1 << HSR_SEQ_BLOCK_SHIFT) with the
> standardized BIT() macro for defining HSR_SEQ_BLOCK_SIZE. This improves
> readability and aligns with kernel coding conventions.

I know that checkpatch suggests this, but I don't agree with it:
HSR_SEQ_BLOCK_SHIFT is not a bitmap but a number, so in my opinion the
BIT() macro makes this particular define harder to read/understand.

> Signed-off-by: Luka Gejak <luka.gejak@linux.dev>
> ---
>  net/hsr/hsr_framereg.h | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/hsr/hsr_framereg.h b/net/hsr/hsr_framereg.h
> index c65ecb925734..cb731ee0ce5c 100644
> --- a/net/hsr/hsr_framereg.h
> +++ b/net/hsr/hsr_framereg.h
> @@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ struct hsr_seq_block *hsr_get_seq_block(struct hsr_node *node, u16 block_idx);
>  #endif
>
>  #define HSR_SEQ_BLOCK_SHIFT 7 /* 128 bits */
> -#define HSR_SEQ_BLOCK_SIZE (1 << HSR_SEQ_BLOCK_SHIFT)
> +#define HSR_SEQ_BLOCK_SIZE BIT(HSR_SEQ_BLOCK_SHIFT)
>  #define HSR_SEQ_BLOCK_MASK (HSR_SEQ_BLOCK_SIZE - 1)
>  #define HSR_MAX_SEQ_BLOCKS 64
>
> --
> 2.53.0
>


  reply	other threads:[~2026-03-26 16:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-03-24 14:46 [PATCH net-next v1 0/7] net: hsr: subsystem cleanups and modernization luka.gejak
2026-03-24 14:46 ` [PATCH net-next v1 1/7] net: hsr: constify hsr_ops and prp_ops protocol operation structures luka.gejak
2026-03-24 14:46 ` [PATCH net-next v1 2/7] net: hsr: replace fallthrough comments with fallthrough macro luka.gejak
2026-03-26 13:34   ` kernel test robot
2026-03-26 16:25   ` Felix Maurer
2026-03-26 21:31   ` kernel test robot
2026-03-26 22:16   ` kernel test robot
2026-03-24 14:46 ` [PATCH net-next v1 3/7] net: hsr: remove unnecessary void function return statement luka.gejak
2026-03-24 14:46 ` [PATCH net-next v1 4/7] net: hsr: use __func__ instead of hardcoded function name luka.gejak
2026-03-24 14:46 ` [PATCH net-next v1 5/7] net: hsr: remove unnecessary braces for single statement block luka.gejak
2026-03-24 14:46 ` [PATCH net-next v1 6/7] net: hsr: add missing blank lines after function declarations luka.gejak
2026-03-24 14:46 ` [PATCH net-next v1 7/7] net: hsr: use BIT() macro for bit shift constant luka.gejak
2026-03-26 16:26   ` Felix Maurer [this message]
2026-03-26 16:25 ` [PATCH net-next v1 0/7] net: hsr: subsystem cleanups and modernization Felix Maurer

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=acVeIQ6K2ytmD5Yq@thinkpad \
    --to=fmaurer@redhat.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=horms@kernel.org \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=liuhangbin@gmail.com \
    --cc=luka.gejak@linux.dev \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.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.