[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201102194055.GA2429929@kroah.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 20:40:55 +0100
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: "siddhant gupta(siddhant1223)" <siddhantgupta416@...il.com>
Cc: matthias.bgg@...il.com, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
mamatashukla555@...il.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
himadrispandya@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: mt7621-dma: Prefer Using BIT Macro instead of
left shifting on 1.
On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 01:04:02AM +0530, siddhant gupta(siddhant1223) wrote:
>
> Replace left shifting on 1 by a BIT macro to fix checkpatch warning.
>
> Signed-off-by: Siddhant Gupta <siddhantgupta416@...il.com>
>
> ---
> drivers/staging/mt7621-dma/mtk-hsdma.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/mt7621-dma/mtk-hsdma.c b/drivers/staging/mt7621-dma/mtk-hsdma.c
> index 354536783e1c..a9e1a1b14035 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/mt7621-dma/mtk-hsdma.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/mt7621-dma/mtk-hsdma.c
> @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@
> #define HSDMA_GLO_TX_DMA BIT(0)
>
> #define HSDMA_BT_SIZE_16BYTES (0 << HSDMA_GLO_BT_SHIFT)
> -#define HSDMA_BT_SIZE_32BYTES (1 << HSDMA_GLO_BT_SHIFT)
> +#define HSDMA_BT_SIZE_32BYTES BIT(HSDMA_GLO_BT_SHIFT)
> #define HSDMA_BT_SIZE_64BYTES (2 << HSDMA_GLO_BT_SHIFT)
> #define HSDMA_BT_SIZE_128BYTES (3 << HSDMA_GLO_BT_SHIFT)
In looking at the code, does this change really make sense?
(hint, I don't think so...)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists