linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 15/24] drm/msm/dsi/phy: Define PHY_CMN_CTRL

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: <0c6c6f0b-02f3-4220-aba4-caeafedc7ff0@linaro.org>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2025 08:11:04 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com>, Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>,
 Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>,
 David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>,
 Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
 Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
 Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
 Krishna Manikandan <quic_mkrishn@...cinc.com>,
 Jonathan Marek <jonathan@...ek.ca>, Kuogee Hsieh <quic_khsieh@...cinc.com>,
 Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>, Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>,
 Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
 Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>, Stephen Boyd
 <sboyd@...nel.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
 dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
 Srinivas Kandagatla <srini@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 15/24] drm/msm/dsi/phy: Define PHY_CMN_CTRL_0 bitfields

On 20/05/2025 23:23, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>
>> There is no checkpatch --strict warning here exactly for the reason I
>> was saying. For readability there should be no empty line after because
>> such statements are expected to be together. I don't mind of course
>> adding one, so I will implement the change.
> 
> I'd prefer this:
> 
> u32 data;
> 
> data = readl();
> data &= foo;;

Ah, ok, I understand now.

Best regards,
Krzysztof