On Wed, 24 Apr 2013, Rabin Vincent wrote: > 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.
I'll do that. Thanks for the pointer. -- Lee Jones Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog -- 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/
