Hi Thanks for the reply. > I'm in favor of getting rid of bitfields due to its not so defined way of > working (and forgive me for using it in first place) but I don't quite like > the current approach. Because , its less readable the way we are writing to those different fields ? But this can be made more verbose by adding some comments around . > Rather I'd like to have custom bitmasks (S900/S700/S500?) for writing to those > fields. > I think S900 and S500 are same as pointed out by Cristian. and I didn't get by creating custom bitmasks for it ? Did you mean function like: lli->hw[OWL_DMADESC_FLEN]= llc_hw_FLEN(len, FCNT_VALUE, FCNT_SHIFT); Thanks -Amit _______________________________________________ linux-actions mailing list linux-actions@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-actions
