2015-06-26 22:08 GMT+09:00 Vaibhav Hiremath <[email protected]>: > Instead of hard coding the shift for bit definition, use > BIT() macro.
I am not convinced that such change improves anything in existing code. IMHO (1 << n) is quite readable and obvious. The obviousness of it, is the same as obviousness of BIT(n). However I know that Lee Jones likes the BIT() so it's up to him :) . In the same time you are cleaning a little the indentation in defines which is nice, but messes with main change. It is difficult to find the exact differences, to review it. Can you split the patch into two commits - one for BIT (if this is desired by Lee Jones) and one for white space clean up? Best regards, Krzysztof -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
