Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755490Ab3FML56 (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Jun 2013 07:57:58 -0400 Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:42601 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751406Ab3FML55 (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Jun 2013 07:57:57 -0400 Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 12:56:40 +0100 From: Russell King - ARM Linux To: Srinivas KANDAGATLA Cc: Michal Simek , linux-arm , Andrew Morton , Arnd Bergmann , "David S. Miller" , devicetree-discuss , Grant Likely , Greg Kroah-Hartman , John Stultz , Linus Walleij , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, LKML , linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, Mark Brown , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Olof Johansson , Rob Herring , Rob Landley , Samuel Ortiz , Stephen Gallimore , Stuart Menefy , Thomas Gleixner , Tony Prisk Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/11] ARM:stixxxx: Add STiH415 SOC support Message-ID: <20130613115640.GC18614@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1370855828-5318-1-git-send-email-srinivas.kandagatla@st.com> <1370856381-6644-1-git-send-email-srinivas.kandagatla@st.com> <51B5BCB3.3060405@st.com> <20130610231934.GG18614@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <51B6C8B7.50807@st.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <51B6C8B7.50807@st.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1129 Lines: 22 On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 07:50:31AM +0100, Srinivas KANDAGATLA wrote: > You are right, It does not make sense to use BIT() macro for field which > has more than 1 bit. I think using mix of both BIT() and the old style > will make code look bit confusing to reader, Also no other mach code in > the kernel use BIT while configuring L2 controller. So am going to drop > the idea of using BIT here and leave the code as it is. I'd suggest putting a comment in the code to that effect. With the way "cleanups" get done, I wouldn't be surprised if this attracts a lot of people wanting to do a trivial "1 << bit" -> "BIT(bit)" conversions. One of the problems of open source is that you can say "no" to a patch like that until you're blue in the face, but it will eventually make its way in via some path. Just one of the reasons I consider BIT() to be evil and an inappropriate macro. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/