linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: exynos: fsd: Gate ref_clk and put UFS device in reset on suspend

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <c9cd3d39-37ec-42cf-9458-e3242fe1f302@acm.org>
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2025 08:46:58 -0700
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To: Bharat Uppal <bharat.uppal@...sung.com>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com,
 martin.petersen@...cle.com, alim.akhtar@...sung.com, avri.altman@....com,
 linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org
Cc: pankaj.dubey@...sung.com, aswani.reddy@...sung.com,
 Nimesh Sati <nimesh.sati@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: exynos: fsd: Gate ref_clk and put UFS device
 in reset on suspend

On 8/4/25 4:36 AM, Bharat Uppal wrote:
> +static int fsd_ufs_suspend(struct exynos_ufs *ufs)
> +{
> +	exynos_ufs_gate_clks(ufs);
> +	hci_writel(ufs, 0 << 0, HCI_GPIO_OUT);
> +	return 0;
> +}

Why '0 << 0' instead of just '0'? Isn't the latter easier to read?

Thanks,

Bart.