Hi Tom,
On Sun, Aug 19, 2018 at 09:51:42PM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 02:00:27AM +0200, Eugeniu Rosca wrote:
[..]
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/armv8/mmu.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/armv8/mmu.h index 62d00d15c26d..b2ce13db0d2b 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/armv8/mmu.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/armv8/mmu.h @@ -94,11 +94,11 @@ #define TCR_TG0_4K (0 << 14) #define TCR_TG0_64K (1 << 14) #define TCR_TG0_16K (2 << 14) -#define TCR_EPD1_DISABLE (1 << 23) +#define TCR_EPD1_DISABLE BIT(23)
-#define TCR_EL1_RSVD (1 << 31) -#define TCR_EL2_RSVD (1 << 31 | 1 << 23) -#define TCR_EL3_RSVD (1 << 31 | 1 << 23) +#define TCR_EL1_RSVD BIT(31) +#define TCR_EL2_RSVD (BIT(31) | BIT(23)) +#define TCR_EL3_RSVD (BIT(31) | BIT(23))
#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ static inline void set_ttbr_tcr_mair(int el, u64 table, u64 tcr, u64 attr)
For consistency within the file, spell it out as 1UL ? I don't like mixing shifts and BITS in a file, and I really don't like being inconsistent, so I'd also be OK with BIT() in all of the bits.
I will use (1UL << i) in v2, unless there is some strong preference to use BIT() macro. In the latter case, a simple definition like (7 << N) will require conversion to (BIT(N+2) | BIT(N+1) | BIT(N)), which looks more complicated to me.
-- Tom
Thanks, Eugeniu.