[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZbkBZPm2R9LgYYCI@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2024 14:02:12 +0000
From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Romain Gantois <romain.gantois@...tlin.com>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
Jose Abreu <joabreu@...opsys.com>,
Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
Clément Léger <clement.leger@...tlin.com>,
Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>,
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/7] net: phy: add PHY_F_RXC_ALWAYS_ON to PHY
dev flags
On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 02:55:50PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > @@ -768,6 +768,7 @@ struct phy_device {
> >
> > /* Generic phy_device::dev_flags */
> > #define PHY_F_NO_IRQ 0x80000000
> > +#define PHY_F_RXC_ALWAYS_ON BIT(30)
>
> It is a bit odd mixing 0x numbers and BIT() macros for the same class
> of thing. I would use 0x40000000, or convert PHY_F_NO_IRQ to BIT(31)
If I used 0x40000000, there would be review comments suggesting the use
of BIT(). Can't win!
--
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists