Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 5 Jun 2019 08:34:07 +0100
From:   Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To:     Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Allow assembly code to use BIT(), GENMASK(), etc.
 and clean-up arm64 header
Message-ID: <20190605073406.geesp3rbrxajmac6@mbp>
References: <20190527083412.26651-1-yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190527083412.26651-1-yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 05:34:10PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> Some in-kernel headers use _BITUL() instead of BIT().
> 
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
>  arch/s390/include/asm/*.h
> 
> I think the reason is because BIT() is currently not available
> in assembly. It hard-codes 1UL, which is not available in assembly.
[...]
> Masahiro Yamada (2):
>   linux/bits.h: make BIT(), GENMASK(), and friends available in assembly
>   arm64: replace _BITUL() with BIT()
> 
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h | 82 ++++++++++++++++-----------------
>  include/linux/bits.h            | 17 ++++---

I'm not sure it's worth the hassle. It's nice to have the same BIT macro
but a quick grep shows arc, arm64, s390 and x86 using _BITUL. Maybe a
tree-wide clean-up would be more appropriate.

-- 
Catalin