[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <71415CEC-6763-4658-A0C4-7AD4E3C1746D@goldelico.com>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 09:33:57 +0200
From: "H. Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@...delico.com>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
kernel@...a-handheld.com,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
Discussions about the Letux Kernel
<letux-kernel@...nphoenux.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/7] gpio: pca953x: define masks for addressing common and extended registers
Hi Linus,
> Am 02.05.2018 um 14:36 schrieb H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@...delico.com>:
>
>
>> Am 02.05.2018 um 14:29 schrieb Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>:
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 7:31 PM, H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@...delico.com> wrote:
>>> These mask bits are to be used to map the extended register
>>> addreseses (which are defined for an unsupported 8-bit pcal chip)
>>> to 16 and 24 bit chips (pcal6524).
>>>
>>>
>>> +#define PCAL_GPIO_MASK GENMASK(4, 0)
>>> +#define PCAL_PINCTRL_MASK (~PCAL_GPIO_MASK)
>>
>> I'm not sure which would be better here
>>
>> 1) to follow existing style
>> 0x1F
>> 0xE0
>>
>> 2) to use GENMASK() in both definitions
>>
>> 3) as it in this patch.
>>
>>
>> Whatever Linus prefers.
>
> Ok, waiting for his suggestion.
Any advice if we should change or keep this?
(Please do not merge before I submit a v6 because there are
some more suggested-by and reviewed-by).
BR and thanks,
Nikolaus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists