On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 10:05:45AM +0000, Meenakshi Aggarwal wrote: > > CCSR_SCFG_USBDRVVBUS_SELCR_USB1); > > > + UsbPwrFault = (CCSR_SCFG_USBPWRFAULT_DEDICATED << > > > + CCSR_SCFG_USBPWRFAULT_USB3_SHIFT) | > > > + (CCSR_SCFG_USBPWRFAULT_DEDICATED << > > > + CCSR_SCFG_USBPWRFAULT_USB2_SHIFT) | > > > + (CCSR_SCFG_USBPWRFAULT_SHARED << > > > + CCSR_SCFG_USBPWRFAULT_USB1_SHIFT); > > > > Can you change indentation like so?: > > > > UsbPwrFault = (CCSR_SCFG_USBPWRFAULT_DEDICATED << > > CCSR_SCFG_USBPWRFAULT_USB3_SHIFT) | > > (CCSR_SCFG_USBPWRFAULT_DEDICATED << > > CCSR_SCFG_USBPWRFAULT_USB2_SHIFT) | > > (CCSR_SCFG_USBPWRFAULT_SHARED << > > CCSR_SCFG_USBPWRFAULT_USB1_SHIFT); > > > I will accommodate all other changes except I am not getting the > difference between above two. Please tell a bit about the change.
Apologies, I could have been more clear. First of all, it makes the relation between the items within parameters immediately obvious. It is a continuation of the statement within the parentheses. Secondly, it aligns up all of the CCSR_SCFG_USBPWRFAULT_, which makes it a lot easier to see that all the prefixes are the same. In summary, it makes code review easier. Best Regards, Leif _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
