Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-44533-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240130094053.10672-1-wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
 <CAMuHMdUMeHCCiAkNyJMHTGUSTqewt=AWPUy+beA_kR26vcS8_Q@mail.gmail.com> <Zbjc_p_Pin7TAHw4@ninjato>
In-Reply-To: <Zbjc_p_Pin7TAHw4@ninjato>
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2024 12:39:49 +0100
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdVBXXpv9QfttBETQAeeRQjWRvfVJnrpPNiQj-N1SB9GQw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: sh-msiof: avoid integer overflow in constants
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
Cc: linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, 
	linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Wolfram,

On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 12:26=E2=80=AFPM Wolfram Sang
<wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> wrote:
> > What about unifying the individual SIFCTR_?FWM_[0-9]* definitions
> > into SIFCTR_xFWM_[0-9]* instead, and using the bitfield helpers in its
> > sole user?
>
> But they don't match, so we can't unify them?
>
> #define SIFCTR_TFWM_1           (7UL << 29)     /*  Transfer Request when=
 1 empty stage */
>
> vs
>
> #define SIFCTR_RFWM_1           (0 << 13)       /*  Transfer Request when=
 1 valid stages */
>
> Also, the steps don't match (1, 4, 8, 12..) vs (1, 4, 8, 16...).

I stand corrected...

/me looks envious for a brown paper bag...

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--=20
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k=
org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. Bu=
t
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like t=
hat.
                                -- Linus Torvalds