[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Z3e1tuAR5GsEhYLz@shikoro>
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2025 11:02:30 +0100
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>
To: David Laight <david.laight.linux@...il.com>
Cc: linux-i3c@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFT v2 4/5] i3c: mipi-i3c-hci: use get_parity8 helper
instead of open coding it
> > > > - (dynaddr_parity(address) ? DAT_0_DYNADDR_PARITY : 0);
> > > > + (parity8(address) ? 0 : DAT_0_DYNADDR_PARITY);
...
> The old code is:
> > -static inline bool dynaddr_parity(unsigned int addr)
> > -{
> > - addr |= 1 << 7;
> > - addr += addr >> 4;
> > - addr += addr >> 2;
> > - addr += addr >> 1;
> > - return (addr & 1);
> > -}
>
> So:
> 1) it always sets 0x80.
Right, this is why the arguments of the ternary operator above are
exchanged. The old function was basically 'is_odd'.
> 2) it uses addition not exclusive or.
True, but it will work nonetheless because we are only interested in bit
0 of the result. For one bit, XOR and addition are interchangable. The
overflow to other bits is not important.
> So just not the same definition of 'parity'.
I think it is. I mean, I3C wants odd parity, otherwise it will not work.
And Jarkko kindly confirmed it still works.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists