Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755007AbbF0Fgv (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Jun 2015 01:36:51 -0400 Received: from mail-vn0-f53.google.com ([209.85.216.53]:41184 "EHLO mail-vn0-f53.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753965AbbF0Fgp (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Jun 2015 01:36:45 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1435324091-2196-1-git-send-email-vaibhav.hiremath@linaro.org> References: <1435324091-2196-1-git-send-email-vaibhav.hiremath@linaro.org> Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 14:36:44 +0900 X-Google-Sender-Auth: CWGU_h6YNRVd3RewHG2dvKOIfeU Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: 880m80x: Make use of BIT() macro From: Krzysztof Kozlowski To: Vaibhav Hiremath Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, sameo@linux.intel.com, lee.jones@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yizhang@marvell.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 966 Lines: 22 2015-06-26 22:08 GMT+09:00 Vaibhav Hiremath : > Instead of hard coding the shift for bit definition, use > BIT() macro. I am not convinced that such change improves anything in existing code. IMHO (1 << n) is quite readable and obvious. The obviousness of it, is the same as obviousness of BIT(n). However I know that Lee Jones likes the BIT() so it's up to him :) . In the same time you are cleaning a little the indentation in defines which is nice, but messes with main change. It is difficult to find the exact differences, to review it. Can you split the patch into two commits - one for BIT (if this is desired by Lee Jones) and one for white space clean up? Best regards, Krzysztof -- 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/