[PATCH] drm/i915: Don't use BIT() in UAPI section

[PATCH] drm/i915: Don't use BIT() in UAPI section

[Joonas Lahtinen]

Lets not introduce BIT() macro requirement for UAPI for now.

Fixes: 3fd3a6ffe279 ("drm/i915: Simplify i915_reg_read_ioctl")
Signed-off-by: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
---
 include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
index 7266b53191ee..125bde7d9504 100644
--- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
+++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
@@ -1318,7 +1318,7 @@ struct drm_i915_reg_read {
 	 * be specified
 	 */
 	__u64 offset;
-#define I915_REG_READ_8B_WA BIT(0)
+#define I915_REG_READ_8B_WA (1ul << 0)
 
 	__u64 val; /* Return value */
 };
-- 
2.13.6

_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Don't use BIT() in UAPI section

[Chris Wilson]

Quoting Joonas Lahtinen (2017-10-06 11:45:59)
> Lets not introduce BIT() macro requirement for UAPI for now.
> 
> Fixes: 3fd3a6ffe279 ("drm/i915: Simplify i915_reg_read_ioctl")
> Signed-off-by: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>

Yes, this is the simplest solution for now. I mistakenly thought we
would be able to use BIT in uapi, but is not exported yet and the first
one who does has the challene of conflicts. :|

Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Don't use BIT() in UAPI section

[Joonas Lahtinen]

On Fri, 2017-10-06 at 12:00 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Joonas Lahtinen (2017-10-06 11:45:59)
> > Lets not introduce BIT() macro requirement for UAPI for now.
> > 
> > Fixes: 3fd3a6ffe279 ("drm/i915: Simplify i915_reg_read_ioctl")
> > Signed-off-by: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> 
> Yes, this is the simplest solution for now. I mistakenly thought we
> would be able to use BIT in uapi, but is not exported yet and the first
> one who does has the challene of conflicts. :|
> 
> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>

Thanks for the quick review, pushed the patch.

Regards, Joonas
-- 
Joonas Lahtinen
Open Source Technology Center
Intel Corporation
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: Don't use BIT() in UAPI section

[Patchwork]

== Series Details ==

Series: drm/i915: Don't use BIT() in UAPI section
URL   : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/31482/
State : failure

== Summary ==

Series 31482 revision 1 was fully merged or fully failed: no git log

_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx