Hi Linus, > Am 02.05.2018 um 14:36 schrieb H. Nikolaus Schaller <h...@goldelico.com>: > > >> Am 02.05.2018 um 14:29 schrieb Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevche...@gmail.com>: >> >> On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 7:31 PM, H. Nikolaus Schaller <h...@goldelico.com> >> wrote: >>> These mask bits are to be used to map the extended register >>> addreseses (which are defined for an unsupported 8-bit pcal chip) >>> to 16 and 24 bit chips (pcal6524). >>>
>>> >>> +#define PCAL_GPIO_MASK GENMASK(4, 0) >>> +#define PCAL_PINCTRL_MASK (~PCAL_GPIO_MASK) >> >> I'm not sure which would be better here >> >> 1) to follow existing style >> 0x1F >> 0xE0 >> >> 2) to use GENMASK() in both definitions >> >> 3) as it in this patch. >> >> >> Whatever Linus prefers. > > Ok, waiting for his suggestion. Any advice if we should change or keep this? (Please do not merge before I submit a v6 because there are some more suggested-by and reviewed-by). BR and thanks, Nikolaus
