2013/4/24 Lee Jones <[email protected]>: > The aim is to make the code that little more readable. > > Acked-by: Vinod Koul <[email protected]> > Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]> > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <[email protected]>
Please pay closer attention to the semantics of each usage instead of just replacing all x left shifts of 1 by BIT(x) for "readability". > if (seg_max > STEDMA40_MAX_SEG_SIZE) > - seg_max -= (1 << max_w); > + seg_max -= BIT(max_w); > > - if (!IS_ALIGNED(size, 1 << max_w)) > + if (!IS_ALIGNED(size, BIT(max_w))) > return -EINVAL; Here and in all other places where the values are from cfg->data_width, the semantic purpose of the shift is not for setting a particular bit but instead for converting the data_width field into the data width value in bytes. You should not change these usages to BIT(). It would be instead better to just make the cfg->data_width as the number of bytes and convert them to the appropriate hardware field values when the descriptors are constructed. That of course should be in another patch. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
