Ezequiel Garcia <[email protected]> writes: > Robert, > > On 24 August 2015 at 15:24, Robert Jarzmik <[email protected]> wrote: >> Ezequiel Garcia <[email protected]> writes: >> >>> Should we worry about having two definitions for the same bit? >>> Would it be too ugly to mix the two meaning? Something like this: >>> >>> /* This bit has two different meanings on NFCv1 and NFCv2 */ >>> #define NDCR_STOP_ON_UNCOR_ARB_CNTL (0x1 << 19) >> I don't find that very pretty, but if you want I can put that in the patch >> instead. >> > > Yeah, it's far from pretty. > > OK, another idea. How about this: > > #define NFCV2_NDCR_STOP_ON_UNCOR (0x1 << 19) > #define NFCV1_NDCR_ARB_CNTL (0x1 << 19) This one looks much more prettier, I'll take it.
> That'll work. Feel free to send a v2. Okay, I'm on my way. Cheers. -- Robert -- 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/
