From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBCF6CD4F57 for ; Tue, 19 May 2026 10:51:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=mZTqF1pEAObGXhu7gd9s4CQmBWeYlqcuwlD1zX5jd2o=; b=aod1jD2qpdlRvkboJuoVIv/Pto i98SVccZq8RG645F3AkiOOcRi0GpiZ6aPZVIVqLSGY5FVthir8iInej5N7ykpjohuHFKDwpU258i1 gsxlp2GvpQcwhHYWcCwNMF6c7M6rWUXhBTSkd/EZJ1mKwKtjf7+2OBJApIUKFdklMBPVvADNgC4fQ 5sya2gId+N2yrgWctE/QNa/hdIDwDgNI5X1OUWHtK/22IJHXD1Xu6LkISoF9hbJKHeiBtdK8BlyeF bvkDd4lUuZxq3s0fr7k1h8OXClczwXH4cEZvukAtslrR0ZhVRdoNU9lWAqye3xgjTG/UrB/XIukIm qmnn3GdQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wPI3B-00000001D3K-2mSu; Tue, 19 May 2026 10:51:49 +0000 Received: from tor.source.kernel.org ([2600:3c04:e001:324:0:1991:8:25]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wPI3A-00000001D2s-1afL for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 19 May 2026 10:51:48 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by tor.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76F666020F; Tue, 19 May 2026 10:51:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AE59BC2BCB8; Tue, 19 May 2026 10:51:45 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1779187907; bh=+f/VsvcvDGarTr6mOhk+WMyELgLXSSutUe7AMovdBhU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=l0rxXUDuOsUSbU+QlYvPudkg/DArq5zNpx9nSWrdFVclNGaiIsqcmy6FtDeIG63zw pxEoqA5u6er2jC6qAp1OVAQL7gUJXS7ROYf6H0qQn7RsxgbgW20X5JDM9FAJf3Vc+a v3cbZu67ZOFQVmjAtW3/QtK3cK+RPCJ5HB+N6tDqTOvghBE7ftlJsWDKgbBNOwZqXA zb8GGNInVS7jmiILnPIJ8Yg4E5vfSkSQp3cvlLXpheXKRvmPVvsQjiexhKR2F26DsZ 6ZsXGhQFqzDKnQ/rnNASQcKWzd2O/uITzZ3rwx4XbOK5i+dzCiZUSadswjb5IUYKFb ImdwQ8lH0mkpQ== Date: Tue, 19 May 2026 11:51:42 +0100 From: Will Deacon To: Hans Zhang <18255117159@163.com> Cc: robin.murphy@arm.com, joro@8bytes.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] iommu/arm-smmu: Use FIELD_MODIFY() for bitfield operations Message-ID: References: <20260430164545.49637-1-18255117159@163.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260430164545.49637-1-18255117159@163.com> X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Fri, May 01, 2026 at 12:45:43AM +0800, Hans Zhang wrote: > Replace open-coded bitfield modifications with the standard FIELD_MODIFY() > macro. This improves code readability and adds type/range checking without > functional changes. Does it _really_ improve the readability? '&=' and '|=' patterns are pretty idiomatic C code, if you ask me. > FIELD_MODIFY() internally performs the same mask-clear + set operation but > eliminates repetitive boilerplate. > > --- > Hi, If the Maintainers think it's not necessary, please ignore it. I don't really mind the code either way, so I think I'd prefer to leave it as-is unless somebody wants to convince me otherwise... Will