On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 22:58:44 +0530 Himanshu Jha <himanshujha199640@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 19, 2018 at 05:02:15PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 16:37:25 +0530 > > Himanshu Jha <himanshujha199640@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 12:03:15PM -0700, David Frey wrote: > > > > Signed-off-by: David Frey <dpfrey@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Himanshu Jha <himanshujha199640@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Tested-by: Himanshu Jha <himanshujha199640@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Also, 0-day tested with build success! > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > > Applied, > > > > There is one more suspicious bit of indenting in here > > #define BME680_REG_CTRL_GAS_1 0x71 > > #define BME680_RUN_GAS_MASK BIT(4) > > #define BME680_NB_CONV_MASK GENMASK(3, 0) > > #define BME680_RUN_GAS_EN_BIT BIT(4) > > #define BME680_NB_CONV_0_VAL 0 > > > > I think RUN_GAS_EN_BIT should be one level lower? > > No, its fine. It is a value and third level indent is expected. > It should be set to 1 to initiate measurement. And > the total mask value is > 0b00001000 == BME680_RUN_GAS_EN_BIT | BME680_NB_CONV_0_VAL > Ah, then I'd argue it's name is wrong. BIT elsewhere has been used to indicate a field in the register, not a value. Should probably just be BME680_RUN_GAS_EN? Jonathan >
