[U-Boot] [PATCH v4 1/4] bitops: introduce BIT() definition

[Jagan Teki]

On 7 September 2015 at 17:45, Marek Vasut <marex at denx.de> wrote:
> On Monday, September 07, 2015 at 02:01:11 PM, Andreas Bießmann wrote:
>> Hi Heiko,
>>
>> On 2015-09-07 13:52, Heiko Schocher wrote:
>> > Hello Andreas,
>> >
>> > Am 07.09.2015 um 13:20 schrieb Andreas Bießmann:
>> >> On 08/21/2015 07:01 PM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
>> >>> introduce BIT() definition, used in at91_udc gadget
>> >>> driver.
>> >>>
>> >>> Signed-off-by: Heiko Schocher <hs at denx.de>
>> >>
>> >> NAK, this one breaks a lot of boards which already defined BIT()
>> >
>> > Uhh... seems this BIT() macro is a big mess ...
>> >
>> > Hmm Wolfgang Denk NACKed a similiar patch:
>> > http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2014-February/173669.html
>> >
>> > In drivers/usb/gadget/at91_udc.c BIT(x) is used only once...
>> > So I fix it there and use (1 << x) there. Would be this OK?
>>
>> I'm fine with this solution.
>
> On the other hand, mainline Linux is moving towards GENMASK() and BIT(),
> so we should probably go with that as well.

Sent some couple of patches to use these macros, but Wolfgang Denk is
not quite OK, with this move.

https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/470475/
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/470476/
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/470477/
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/470478/
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/470479/

thanks!
-- 
Jagan | openedev.