On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 09:34:59AM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Guenter, > > On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 14:14:50 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 10:13:47PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > > > Define JC42_CFG_HYST_MASK as the mask _before_ shifting instead of > > > after shifting. This simplifies the current code slightly, and will > > > simplify the code to come even more. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > drivers/hwmon/jc42.c | 13 ++++++------- > > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > > > --- linux-3.5.orig/drivers/hwmon/jc42.c 2012-07-26 22:02:32.000000000 +0200 > > > +++ linux-3.5/drivers/hwmon/jc42.c 2012-07-26 22:04:46.911073234 +0200 > > > @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ static const unsigned short normal_i2c[] > > > #define JC42_CFG_EVENT_LOCK (1 << 7) > > > #define JC42_CFG_SHUTDOWN (1 << 8) > > > #define JC42_CFG_HYST_SHIFT 9 > > > -#define JC42_CFG_HYST_MASK 0x03 > > > +#define JC42_CFG_HYST_MASK (0x03 << 9) > > > > > > > Since we have JC42_CFG_HYST_SHIFT, might as well use it. > > I thought about it but wasn't sure. The two definitions are next to > each other, and they are not likely to ever change, so the benefit of > using JC42_CFG_HYST_SHIFT in JC42_CFG_HYST_MASK wasn't too obvious. And > a copy/paste/forget-to-update error seems less likely to happen with a > straight number. > Makes sense. I'll apply as-is. Guenter _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
