On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 07:36:42AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
No really for this patch, but I would much prefer to document them next to the code in the long run. Also I really think these BIT() macros are a distraction compared to the (1 << N) notation.
Not much difference to me but maybe plain number: ... 0x01u ... 0x02u ?
I prefer the little bit shifts, but even the explicit values are much better than the obsfucating macros :) Anyway, your patch and in the end all three methods will get the work done.
I'd just kill this helper, much easier to simply open code it in the caller.
Keeping it for now helps reducing the number of changes in the patch. The patch will be quite big as it has to replace all the uses atomically.
I can get rid of the helper in consecutive patch.
Sounds fine.