linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 7/8] dmaengine: ste_dma40: Use the BIT macro to replace ugly '(1 << x)'s

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 9 Apr 2013 21:12:55 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>
Cc:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linus.walleij@...ricsson.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] dmaengine: ste_dma40: Use the BIT macro to replace ugly '(1 << x)'s

On Tuesday 09 April 2013, Harvey Harrison wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> wrote:
> >
> > The aim is to make the code that little more readable.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
> > ---
> 
> >
> >  #define MAX(a, b) (((a) < (b)) ? (b) : (a))
> 
> Not part of your patch, but probably a good idea to switch to the
> generic MAX macro, this
> one is evaluating its args twice.

Yes, good point. The macro is only used in one place, to compare
two compile-time constant values, but we should define macros in
drivers that are already provided by the kernel.

	Arnd
--
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/