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]

Date:	Sat, 27 Jun 2015 14:36:44 +0900
From:	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
To:	Vaibhav Hiremath <vaibhav.hiremath@...aro.org>
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

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?

Best regards,
Krzysztof
--
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/