On Mon, Feb 12 2018 at 13:40 +0000, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 9 Feb 2018, Lina Iyer wrote:+enum pdc_irq_config_bits { + PDC_POLARITY_LOW = 0, + PDC_FALLING_EDGE = 2, + PDC_POLARITY_HIGH = 4, + PDC_RISING_EDGE = 6, + PDC_DUAL_EDGE = 7,My previous comment about using binary constants still stands. Please either address review comments or reply at least. Ignoring reviews is not an option. Aside of that I really have to ask about the naming of these constants. Are these names hardware register nomenclature? If yes, they are disgusting. If no, they are still disgusting, but should be changed to sensible ones, which just match the IRQ_TYPE naming convention. PDC_LEVEL_LOW = 000b, PDC_EDGE_FALLING = 010b, ....
Checkpatch doesn't like binary constants. I guess I will need to keep the enum definitions in hex or decimal. I will remove the binary from the comments though. commit 95e2c6023b0e4c8499fb521697f79215f69135fe Author: Joe Perches <[email protected]> Date: Wed Jul 3 15:05:20 2013 -0700 checkpatch: warn when using gcc's binary constant ("0b") extension The gcc extension for binary constants that start with 0b is only supported with gcc version 4.3 or higher. The kernel can still be compiled with earlier versions of gcc, so have checkpatch emit a warning for these constants. Restructure checkpatch's constant finding code a bit to support finding these binary constants. Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <[email protected]> Suggested-by: Andrew Morton <[email protected]> Cc: Andy Whitcroft <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]> Thanks, Lina
