From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wm1-f53.google.com (mail-wm1-f53.google.com [209.85.128.53]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFF883090D5 for ; Wed, 10 Dec 2025 10:05:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.53 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1765361104; cv=none; b=ddfY+zVzlGUFv5gjDrNVT/ztQgsadjr2ZliNLZ7o1K62Gecx/9VZH3ogmb3qMtM8gHGzkiSA1gJkCiJA0ppl/fp8XCs+ZLba5e1BbJ73LVuxjQYlKby93pxShpYPjevI55e7u4nQuiQ7/93TRcy/ZmXa/HxmvJX5R4zauT3ky1E= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1765361104; c=relaxed/simple; bh=mn4zdl3vn29wXnpVK+tSko8k/DOvLsEFY2jIMYzzMAc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=AzxXfIo+nzCFA30VBcHfN1vDEi0WYyqP7PjsvWZZtxBAa+11AtDh35Rpudky1SRe1iEg1xYFXSshnQrVXasA/x+2Djwq+oaP1jXtfNllzH0O8JSMKu/zCa4Jxb5vGcI0p9om7NToN3fhc1okCf4sbupPh4mRJ/M3ZLImi6y+APA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=TTUSbCfY; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.53 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="TTUSbCfY" Received: by mail-wm1-f53.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4779adb38d3so62247775e9.2 for ; Wed, 10 Dec 2025 02:05:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1765361101; x=1765965901; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=uM9jv5+Xf8bSG44VGgVRyBWdElgj5hCgqPr3kHTSQBM=; b=TTUSbCfYyOtNhOmldmbpenarwGIfT0H4MDYD9MsV5RqxWql3COoITbKzYia9PIU2v1 NwCulhObWQkfxCK2VqS9u3ALRcjYAKb1ZBoyTfPTt8ovBe7eHstkmzPLVPm/INspRYvB iVqRw+uF57YAPLNwFKqVKx80zHz7EKLC84qSYmqBKnik1Id1cK/Y0CGufzk80POj5Xbo jdBkC/VMrn5GfXUpCykmmMH5q2nK04DQSOJ7o5m7FzYn3OWaeXQmrB61zZyJGQSTBOV5 DZufdlqZkk5m1RnfQ5W3Bj8YbcBWfZybUexgiCG7Jz7xikFfWRJlDXXZdh+1SPbTrtar jKXQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1765361101; x=1765965901; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=uM9jv5+Xf8bSG44VGgVRyBWdElgj5hCgqPr3kHTSQBM=; b=mXxcEgJn483iK0FXLMyWgIZtfo86vFFSKi168Ljwedl+3c2JUjtRxkHOnPCj3OrWYc n+rQcdhn60WQhXqsi3iMtkkMW7v7GZx6cffu92pi3wKZ7lKlrsp9zX38S9g3ze6qMoRn 6o0qbRqu636rfiENJhJbDEIRuniL8DXSh28AQ7tfm9WlBOcXoQyUONIv1GQvvurKZhKH 3bE4XObcGyZVi423y6PEASNOO+bKwm6Z1MA3TRt7SApFkZniSqNGFKg7U0ldBM3bmq+9 8o61zABA29eEG1XSFPAAunnUQnKDC2DOBXBq33k55MAjkJ8PtYNoZCFr+t1WpUiHJWwh swDQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUh/03bJT+bavIX1lGQE4wX0hPT3pf4E3JIz93DNhuY1Q4RmuJqxSenMP1EzOmdXXv3uOSRqDA=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yyqtj7Lw/yjiIwVH5t+34hk+6MBBOMinj8FMEAyzFQ7ga0Gzhlg nULjaqwqNt7uIcCTkzzdE/xCICLQ9NRmIu5FMbn/brVhy+2ImPIxwD6u X-Gm-Gg: AY/fxX54X2nFjRjhfvcTltwNPAXI5TKOXy9Yz4Ln/ulsNlXKAnMK9x6pWbuU53TJcSu LkD/UfhOYmQsTpa5MBa6jiYpnET0f94OICTmFpKYaibwRDqmVrFc381qS10SbXydm6p7CUXLnp7 sZ8RNSyR7E1gN+zUfaaoaNUuPQSt8PKN5LiPXIOdTGM/fLkbpctlawQbIoxGLdg/oTIAaUEPrUO VR4gL/b01SZtvANI30xpz160+QrJ5sLqouFaE9tT6Hfoy8VhYCFao8kL7jpkfGw5AjKOBgm8gLD Yd7ym8O1luz+ApQE5ZnelkFN+xiHzbh/60jONzL1X1NexBLSLlHDddB7XD7Fxm8b4qXrhOCpf+y eZy8K2vVdvI29H8VYXHAVXuxg78KoxBXyTG9z4ge0kPuJ5YfscO4B8EqQpGmDrAwRLCdl0f6tY0 EPepdTV4eXdFhjm63xagSDwyWr2XkUe8qUguNQqcGxqDluh5n/rqbz X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGc/2temuso/dMXAd/z/Fp268Bw24VHuUY6WJXcwM+QAE/5iSiD8jpsCrHfLSA7sKTxPtCcmQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:290f:b0:401:5ad1:682 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-42fa39d1f95mr1650927f8f.14.1765361100899; Wed, 10 Dec 2025 02:05:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from pumpkin (82-69-66-36.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk. [82.69.66.36]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-42f7d222484sm37265629f8f.24.2025.12.10.02.05.00 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 10 Dec 2025 02:05:00 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2025 10:04:58 +0000 From: David Laight To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: Yury Norov , Rasmus Villemoes , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, Geert Uytterhoeven , Alexandre Belloni , Jonathan Cameron , Crt Mori , Richard Genoud , Andy Shevchenko , Luo Jie , Peter Zijlstra , netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S . Miller" , Simon Horman , Mika Westerberg , Andreas Noever , Yehezkel Bernat , Nicolas Frattaroli Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] nfp: Call FIELD_PREP() in NFP_ETH_SET_BIT_CONFIG() wrapper Message-ID: <20251210100458.57620549@pumpkin> In-Reply-To: <20251210182947.3f628953@kernel.org> References: <20251209100313.2867-1-david.laight.linux@gmail.com> <20251209100313.2867-2-david.laight.linux@gmail.com> <20251210182947.3f628953@kernel.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.1.1 (GTK 3.24.38; arm-unknown-linux-gnueabihf) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 10 Dec 2025 18:29:47 +0900 Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Tue, 9 Dec 2025 10:03:05 +0000 david.laight.linux@gmail.com wrote: > > Rather than use a define that should be internal to the implementation > > of FIELD_PREP(), pass the shifted 'val' to nfp_eth_set_bit_config() > > and change the test for 'value unchanged' to match. > > > > This is a simpler change than the one used to avoid calling both > > FIELD_GET() and FIELD_PREP() with non-constant mask values. > > I'd like this code to be left out of the subjective churn please. > I like it the way I wrote it. The 'problem' is that I want to remove __BF_FIELD_CHECK(). It has already been split into two (for 6.19) but it makes sense to split into three (to avoid code-bloat in the cpp output). IMHO Using a define that is part of the implementation of FIELD_xxxx() is wrong anyway. > I also liked the bitfield.h the way > I wrote it but I guess that part "belongs" to the community at large. There are already significant changes there for 6.19-rc1 David > > FWIW - thumbs up for patch 8, no opinion on the rest.