[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BN3PR0101MB1057EE70E83A679918C4F8D6D01C0@BN3PR0101MB1057.prod.exchangelabs.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 16:45:21 +0000
From: Hartley Sweeten <HartleyS@...ionengravers.com>
To: Ian Abbott <abbotti@....co.uk>,
Ranjith Thangavel <ranjithece24@...il.com>,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC: "devel@...verdev.osuosl.org" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] comedi: dmm32at: Fix coding style - use BIT macro
On Wednesday, November 18, 2015 9:42 AM, Ian Abbott wrote:
> On 16/11/15 17:18, Ranjith Thangavel wrote:
[snip]
>> -#define DMM32AT_AI_CFG_SCINT_20US (0 << 4)
>> -#define DMM32AT_AI_CFG_SCINT_15US (1 << 4)
>> -#define DMM32AT_AI_CFG_SCINT_10US (2 << 4)
>> -#define DMM32AT_AI_CFG_SCINT_5US (3 << 4)
>> -#define DMM32AT_AI_CFG_RANGE (1 << 3) /* 0=5V 1=10V */
>> -#define DMM32AT_AI_CFG_ADBU (1 << 2) /* 0=bipolar 1=unipolar */
>> +#define DMM32AT_AI_CFG_SCINT_20US 0
>> +#define DMM32AT_AI_CFG_SCINT_15US BIT(4)
>> +#define DMM32AT_AI_CFG_SCINT_10US (BIT(5) & ~BIT(4))
>
> The `(BIT(5) & ~BIT(4))` is a bit ugly. You can just use `BIT(5)` to
> fit in with the style of your other changes.
>
> (Personally though, I don't think BIT() is appropriate for shifted,
> multi-bit values.)
It would be more appropriate as a macro:
#define DMM32AT_AI_CFG_SCINT(x) (((x) & 0x3) << 4)
#define DMM32AT_AI_CFG_SCINT_20US DMM32AT_AI_CFG_SCINT (0)
#define DMM32AT_AI_CFG_SCINT_15US DMM32AT_AI_CFG_SCINT (1)
#define DMM32AT_AI_CFG_SCINT_10US DMM32AT_AI_CFG_SCINT (2)
#define DMM32AT_AI_CFG_SCINT_5US DMM32AT_AI_CFG_SCINT (3)
Regards,
Hartley
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists