Hi Mark, Amadeusz, Jerome, Pierre-Louis > [Flag style] > unsigned int flags; > #define SND_SOC_FLAGS_ASSERTION_PLAYBACK BIT(x) > #define SND_SOC_FLAGS_ASSERTION_CAPTURE BIT(x) > ... > > [BitField style] > unsigned int playback_assertion:1; > unsigned int capture_assertion:1; > ... (snip) > So, my suggestion is that next v3 patch uses [Flag style]. > And after that, post new patch-set to switch > [BitField style] to [Flag style] for other flags. > But I wonder is this good approach ? I would like to fixup my comment above. Actually, I have no objection about current [BitField style]. If there is no special opinion/objection about this, I will post [BitField style] in v3 patch-set with assertion flag (= dpcm_xxx, and xxx_only compatible). Switching to [Flag style] can be next topic/patch-set. I will wait comment mail until end of this week. If there was no comment, I will post v3 patch then. Thank you for your help !! Best regards --- Renesas Electronics Ph.D. Kuninori Morimoto
