On 2014/12/11 14:37, Joe Perches wrote:
On Thu, 2014-12-11 at 11:57 +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Thursday 11 December 2014 11:42 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
On Thu, 2014-12-11 at 11:32 +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
On Wednesday 10 December 2014 04:16 PM, Yunzhi Li wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c b/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c
[]
+/*
+ * The higher 16-bit of this register is used for write protection
+ * only if BIT(13 + 16) set to 1 the BIT(13) can be written.
+ */
+#define SIDDQ_MSK BIT(13 + 16)
huh?
This #define looks _very_ odd.
Is this supposed to be a single bit 29 or
some range?
From what I understood, the most significant 16 bits are write locks to the
least significant 16 bits.
So If I have to write something on bit 0, I have to set bit 16.
If I have to write something on bit 1, I have to set bit 17.
If I have to write something on bit 2, I have to set bit 18.
and so on.
To me it'd look better to use another << rather than a plus
Like (BIT(13) << 16)? It looks strange, or could I just use ((1 << 13)
<< 16) to describe this bit ?
---
Yunzhi Li @ rockchip
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
