mirror of
https://github.com/edk2-porting/linux-next.git
synced 2024-12-21 11:44:01 +08:00
9d15662175
Use the BIT(n) macro instead of '(1 << n)' in definitions where the bit semantics clearly applies. Fixes true positive "Prefer using the BIT macro" checks reported by checkpatch. Some of these checks are still triggering on definitions using '(1 << n)', namely for PIO2_CNTR_SC_DEV1, PIO2_CNTR_RW_LSB and PIO2_CNTR_MODE1. Leave them be, as the context there is more of a "multi-bit field value" ((val << n), where for some cases 'val' happens to be 1) rather than a "single bit" (1 << n), so keeping the value as is in the code makes it more readable that using a combination of BIT macros. Signed-off-by: Ricardo Silva <rjpdasilva@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> |
||
---|---|---|
.. | ||
devices | ||
Makefile |