[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110119053715.GA26304@suse.de>
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 21:37:15 -0800
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
To: Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
Cc: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
Hank Janssen <hjanssen@...rosoft.com>,
devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging/hv/osd: don't reimplement ALIGN macro
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 04:39:11PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
> ---
> drivers/staging/hv/osd.h | 5 ++---
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/hv/osd.h b/drivers/staging/hv/osd.h
> index ce064e8..61ae54c 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/hv/osd.h
> +++ b/drivers/staging/hv/osd.h
> @@ -28,10 +28,9 @@
> #include <linux/workqueue.h>
>
> /* Defines */
> -#define ALIGN_UP(value, align) (((value) & (align-1)) ? \
> - (((value) + (align-1)) & ~(align-1)) : \
> - (value))
> +#define ALIGN_UP(value, align) ALIGN((value), (align))
How about dropping ALIGN_UP entirely and just using the built-in ALIGN()
macro instead?
> #define ALIGN_DOWN(value, align) ((value) & ~(align-1))
Any chance to get rid of this as well with the ALIGN() macro, or is that
really not possible?
thanks,
greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists