[U-Boot] [PATCH v5] bitops: introduce BIT() definition
Scott Wood
scottwood at freescale.com
Wed Sep 9 21:04:38 CEST 2015
On Wed, 2015-09-09 at 20:25 +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Andreas,
>
> In message <1441626234-16364-1-git-send-email-andreas.devel at googlemail.com>
> you wrote:
> ...
> > --- a/include/linux/bitops.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/bitops.h
> > @@ -3,6 +3,8 @@
> >
> > #include <asm/types.h>
> >
> > +#define BIT(nr) (1UL << (nr))
>
> What happens when someone decides to use this on a 64 bit register?
>
> Also, this definition is inherently wrong for Power Architecture (TM)
> systems, where bit 0 is the most significant bit.
It's not "inherently wrong" to number bits from LSB on such systems -- it
just doesn't match the unusual convention found in PPC documentation and the
rotate instructions.
In any case, this would be part of the Linux driver compatibility layer
rather than the placement in common.h that you previously objected to.
-Scott
More information about the U-Boot
mailing list