On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 02:32:29PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > PADCFG0 and PADCFG1 are ordered from MSB to LSB, do the same > for PADCFG2 bit fields. Perhaps: No functional changes. > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Acked-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] pinctrl: intel: Use same order of bit fields for PADCFG2
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] pinctrl: intel: Use same order of bit fields for PADCFG2
- From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2022 16:34:35 +0200
- In-reply-to: <20221219123229.5564-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
- References: <20221219123229.5564-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] pinctrl: intel: Use same order of bit fields for PADCFG2
- From: Andy Shevchenko
- Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] pinctrl: intel: Use same order of bit fields for PADCFG2
- From: Andy Shevchenko
- Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] pinctrl: intel: Use same order of bit fields for PADCFG2
- References:
- [PATCH v1 1/1] pinctrl: intel: Use same order of bit fields for PADCFG2
- From: Andy Shevchenko
- [PATCH v1 1/1] pinctrl: intel: Use same order of bit fields for PADCFG2
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] pinctrl: intel: Convert to generic_handle_domain_irq()
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] pinctrl: intel: Define maximum pad number in the group
- Previous by thread: [PATCH v1 1/1] pinctrl: intel: Use same order of bit fields for PADCFG2
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] pinctrl: intel: Use same order of bit fields for PADCFG2
- Index(es):
 |