On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 07:36:42AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > No really for this patch, but I would much prefer to document them next > > to the code in the long run. Also I really think these BIT() macros > > are a distraction compared to the (1 << N) notation. > > Not much difference to me but maybe plain number: > ... 0x01u > ... 0x02u > ? I prefer the little bit shifts, but even the explicit values are much better than the obsfucating macros :) Anyway, your patch and in the end all three methods will get the work done. > > I'd just kill this helper, much easier to simply open code it in the > > caller. > > Keeping it for now helps reducing the number of changes in the patch. > The patch will be quite big as it has to replace all the uses atomically. > > I can get rid of the helper in consecutive patch. Sounds fine. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |