Hi Simon,
On 29 April 2015 at 20:12, Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org wrote:
Hi Tom,
On 29 April 2015 at 07:08, Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 05:35:05PM +0530, Jagannadha Sutradharudu Teki wrote:
Replace (1 << nr) to BIT(nr) where nr = 0, 1, 2 .... 31
Signed-off-by: Jagannadha Sutradharudu Teki jagannadh.teki@gmail.com Cc: Masahiro Yamada yamada.m@jp.panasonic.com Cc: Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com Cc: Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org
I think that conceptually this is a good idea. We need to apply this fairly quickly however as it already throws out a few rejects with the PRs I've taken and doing some local testing on.
We have to date avoided this (I've been here before). But I think it is useful. One concern I have is misuse, when someone does BIT(0) | BIT(1))| BIT(2) | BIT(3) instead of 0xf, for example.
Probably we can achieve this with GENMASK(h, l), may be we can add that also?
Anyway as you say, let's do it fast if we are going this way.
thanks!