linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/4] platform/x86: intel_pmc

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: <20190410135913.GK9224@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 10 Apr 2019 16:59:13 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
        platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
        Zha Qipeng <qipeng.zha@...el.com>, junxiao.chang@...el.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/4] platform/x86: intel_pmc_ipc: Use BIT() macro

On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 08:39:39PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 10:07:35AM -0700, sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy wrote:
> > On 4/9/19 4:25 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > Use BIT() and BIT_MASK() macros for definitions.
> > Looks good to me.
> 
> Thanks!

If you have no further comments, can you provide your tag here?

> 
> > >   /* PMC register bit definitions */
> > >   /* PMC_CFG_REG bit masks */
> > > -#define PMC_CFG_NO_REBOOT_MASK		(1 << 4)
> > > +#define PMC_CFG_NO_REBOOT_MASK		BIT_MASK(4)
> > >   #define PMC_CFG_NO_REBOOT_EN		(1 << 4)
> > >   #define PMC_CFG_NO_REBOOT_DIS		(0 << 4)
> > Do we need 0 << 4 ?
> 
> Yes, to explicitly show that this is a value for NO_REBOOT masked bit(s)
> (single bit in this case).
> 
> -- 
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko
> 
> 

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko