Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 05/16/2014 06:37 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: > >>> - ar->free_vdev_map &= ~BIT(arvif->vdev_id); >>> + ar->free_vdev_map &= ~(1 << arvif->vdev_id); >> >> Why remove the BIT()? Not that it matters much, I just think it's easier >> to read when BIT() macro is used. Would be good to convert all cases to >> use BIT anyway, but that's for a separate patch. > > BIT doesn't work on 64-bit numbers (ie, if vdev_id > 31) Oh, I didn't know that. Too bad, but then removing it makes sense. > and it takes a long time to figure out exactly what it does (try > grepping for BIT). Open-coding means much easier to fully understand > the code. All Linux engineers should know what BIT() does. If not, they should learn that ;) >>> - ar->free_vdev_map |= 1 << (arvif->vdev_id); >>> + ar->free_vdev_map |= (1 << arvif->vdev_id); >> >> Do we need the parenthesis? > > No, though I like them visually. It's at least more useful than > the previous placement. > > I can respin the patch w/out them and with the == 0 and such. Thanks. -- Kalle Valo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
