linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mfd: 880m80x: Make use of BIT() macro

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: <558E3BB0.8020308@linaro.org>
Date:	Sat, 27 Jun 2015 11:29:12 +0530
From:	Vaibhav Hiremath <vaibhav.hiremath@...aro.org>
To:	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
CC:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, sameo@...ux.intel.com,
	lee.jones@...aro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	yizhang@...vell.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: 880m80x: Make use of BIT() macro



On Saturday 27 June 2015 11:06 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> 2015-06-26 22:08 GMT+09:00 Vaibhav Hiremath <vaibhav.hiremath@...aro.org>:
>> Instead of hard coding the shift for bit definition, use
>> BIT() macro.
>
> I am not convinced that such change improves anything in existing
> code. IMHO (1 << n) is quite readable and obvious. The obviousness of
> it, is the same as obviousness of BIT(n). However I know that Lee
> Jones likes the BIT() so it's up to him :) .
>
> In the same time you are cleaning a little the indentation in defines
> which is nice, but messes with main change. It is difficult to find
> the exact differences, to review it. Can you split the patch into two
> commits - one for BIT (if this is desired by Lee Jones) and one for
> white space clean up?
>

White spaces changes are not much...

Thanks,
Vaibhav
--
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/