On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 04:26:52PM +0000, Ian Abbott wrote: > >+#define DMM32AT_AI_CFG_SCINT_10US (BIT(5) & ~BIT(4)) > >+#define DMM32AT_AI_CFG_SCINT_5US (BIT(5) | BIT(4)) > > The values of DMM32AT_AI_CFG_SCINT_20US etc. are numerically > correct, but look a bit strange. The `(BIT(5) & ~BIT(4))` looks > especially strange and could be changed to `BIT(5)`. These are all > really shifted 2-bit values, so perhaps the BIT() macro isn't the > best representation. >
BIT(5) & ~BIT(4) is silly. Don't do that. The original code was fine. regards, dan carpenter _______________________________________________ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
