linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 1/5] phy: add a driver for the Rockchip SoC internal USB2.0 PHY

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:	Wed, 10 Dec 2014 23:06:08 -0800
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	Yunzhi Li <lyz@...k-chips.com>
Cc:	Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>, heiko@...ech.de,
	jwerner@...omium.org, dianders@...omium.org, olof@...om.net,
	huangtao@...k-chips.com, zyw@...k-chips.com, cf@...k-chips.com,
	linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/5] phy: add a driver for the Rockchip SoC internal
 USB2.0 PHY

On Thu, 2014-12-11 at 14:52 +0800, Yunzhi Li wrote:
> On 2014/12/11 14:37, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Thu, 2014-12-11 at 11:57 +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
[]
> >> So If I have to write something on bit 0, I have to set bit 16.
> >> If I have to write something on bit 1, I have to set bit 17.
> >> If I have to write something on bit 2, I have to set bit 18.
> >> and so on.
> > To me it'd look better to use another << rather than a plus
> Like (BIT(13) << 16)? It looks strange, or could I just use ((1 << 13) 
> << 16) to describe this bit ?

Up to you.  To me, the BIT(x+y) seems odd.


--
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/