Re: [PATCH 5/5] gpio: dwapb: use d->mask instead od BIT(bit)

[ ignore this if you are busy :) ] On Mon, 2014-04-07 at 20:26 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > On 04/07/2014 02:26 PM, Gerhard Sittig wrote: > > On Mon, 2014-04-07 at 12:13 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > >> > >> d->mask contains exact the same information as BIT(bit) so we

Re: [PATCH 5/5] gpio: dwapb: use d->mask instead od BIT(bit)

On 04/07/2014 02:26 PM, Gerhard Sittig wrote: > On Mon, 2014-04-07 at 12:13 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: >> >> d->mask contains exact the same information as BIT(bit) so we could save >> a few cycles here. > > ISTR that the benefit of saving cycles was questioned in previous > review co

Re: [PATCH 5/5] gpio: dwapb: use d->mask instead od BIT(bit)

On Mon, 2014-04-07 at 12:13 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > d->mask contains exact the same information as BIT(bit) so we could save > a few cycles here. ISTR that the benefit of saving cycles was questioned in previous review comments. On ARM, the shift "comes for free". I'm not sa

[PATCH 5/5] gpio: dwapb: use d->mask instead od BIT(bit)

d->mask contains exact the same information as BIT(bit) so we could save a few cycles here. Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior --- drivers/gpio/gpio-dwapb.c | 26 +- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-dwapb.c b/drivers/