On 13/12/2023 20:13, Peter Griffin wrote: > Hi Alim, > > Thanks for your reviews. > > On Wed, 13 Dec 2023 at 16:34, Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Peter Griffin <peter.griffin@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2023 9:53 PM >>> To: robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; >>> mturquette@xxxxxxxxxxxx; conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx; >>> tomasz.figa@xxxxxxxxx; s.nawrocki@xxxxxxxxxxx; linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx; >>> wim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx; catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx; >>> will@xxxxxxxxxx; arnd@xxxxxxxx; olof@xxxxxxxxx; >>> gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; jirislaby@xxxxxxxxxx; >>> cw00.choi@xxxxxxxxxxx; alim.akhtar@xxxxxxxxxxx >>> Cc: peter.griffin@xxxxxxxxxx; tudor.ambarus@xxxxxxxxxx; >>> andre.draszik@xxxxxxxxxx; semen.protsenko@xxxxxxxxxx; >>> saravanak@xxxxxxxxxx; willmcvicker@xxxxxxxxxx; soc@xxxxxxxxxx; >>> devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- >>> samsung-soc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-clk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- >>> gpio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-watchdog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; kernel- >>> team@xxxxxxxxxxx; linux-serial@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>> Subject: [PATCH v7 11/16] watchdog: s3c2410_wdt: Update QUIRK macros to >>> use BIT macro >>> >>> Update the remaining QUIRK macros to use the BIT macro. >>> >> Ah! I see you have change use BIT here, so you can squash this patch to >> patch 10/16 or >> Move BIT change from patch 10/16 to this patch. Either way is fine. > > I actually kept them separate deliberately to avoid conflating adding > of the DBGACK quirk with cleanup of the driver to use BIT macro. > > As such one patch adds the QUIRK and only updates the macros that were > touched by that patch (to avoid the --strict warnings), and the second > patch cleans up the rest of the macros to use BIT macro for > consistency. Yeah, the defines are from existing code, so not really related to GS101 patch. Keeping it as separate cleanup is fine. Best regards, Krzysztof
