linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 7/7] mfd: Add support for the MediaTek MT6397 PMIC

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]

Message-ID: <20150126111119.GE11745@x1>
Date:	Mon, 26 Jan 2015 11:11:19 +0000
From:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To:	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>
Cc:	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Eddie Huang <eddie.huang@...iatek.com>,
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
	Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
	Yingjoe Chen (陳英洲) 
	<Yingjoe.Chen@...iatek.com>, Henry Chen <henryc.chen@...iatek.com>,
	YH Chen (陳昱豪) <yh.chen@...iatek.com>,
	Flora Fu <flora.fu@...iatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] mfd: Add support for the MediaTek MT6397 PMIC

On Mon, 26 Jan 2015, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 04:14:40PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Fri, 23 Jan 2015, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > 
> > > From: Flora Fu <flora.fu@...iatek.com>
> > > 
> > > This adds support for the MediaTek MT6397 PMIC. This is a
> > > multifunction device with the following sub modules:
> > > 
> > > - Regulator
> > > - RTC
> > > - Audio codec
> > > - GPIO
> > > - Clock
> > > 
> > > It is interfaced to the host controller using SPI interface by a proprietary
> > > hardware called PMIC wrapper or pwrap. MT6397 MFD is a child device of the
> > > pwrap.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Flora Fu, MediaTek
> > > Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>
> > > Cc: Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>
> > > Cc: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
> > > ---
> > >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mt6397.txt |  70 +++++

[...]

> > > +	struct mt6397_chip *mt6397 = irq_get_chip_data(data->irq);
> > > +	int shift = mt6397_irq_shift(data->hwirq);
> > > +	int reg = mt6397_irq_reg(data->hwirq);
> > > +	int reg_ofs = MT6397_INT_CON0 + reg * 2;
> > > +
> > > +	mt6397->irq_masks_cur[reg] &= ~(1 << shift);
> > 
> > s/(1 << shift)/BIT(shift)/
> 
> Is it mentioned somewhere that these BIT macros shall be used? There are
> quadrillions of examples for both styles in the kernel and personally I
> think 1 << x is more readable.

I haven't seen a hard and fast 'rule' per say.  I think it's left up
to the Maintainer of any given subsystem. ;)

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
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/