Re: [PATCH v1] ASoC: starfive: Cleanup and fix error check for JH7110 TDM

[Claudiu.Beznea]

On 08.06.2023 13:43, Walker Chen wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> 
> On 2023/6/8 18:15, Mark Brown wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 08, 2023 at 10:15:03AM +0800, Walker Chen wrote:
>>> On 2023/6/7 19:44, Mark Brown wrote:
>>
>>>>> -           (tdm->rx.wl << WL_BIT) |
>>>>> -           (tdm->rx.sscale << SSCALE_BIT) |
>>>>> -           (tdm->rx.sl << SL_BIT) |
>>>>> -           (tdm->rx.lrj << LRJ_BIT);
>>>>> + datarx = (tdm->rxwl << 8) |
>>>>> +           (tdm->rxsscale << 4) |
>>>>> +           (tdm->rxsl << 2) |
>>>>> +           TDM_PCMRXCR_LEFT_J;
>>
>>>> I'm not sure this change to use numbers here is a win - the _BIT
>>>> definitions look fine (I might've called them _SHIFT but whatever).
>>
>>> This is Claudiu's advice. Using the macro BIT() to replace these definition of *_BIT,
>>> it will result in big changes in the code.
>>
>> I'm questioning doing a change at all.
>>
>>> Please refer to previous comments:
>>>  https://lore.kernel.org/all/143e2fa2-e85d-8036-4f74-ca250c026c1b@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/
>>
>> I can't find the comments you're referring to in there.
> 
> You should see the following comments in the link above:
> 
>> +       #define CLKPOL_BIT              5
>> +       #define TRITXEN_BIT             4
>> +       #define ELM_BIT                 3
>> +       #define SYNCM_BIT               2
>> +       #define MS_BIT                  1
> 
> Instead of these *_BIT defines as plain numbers you can defined them using
> BIT() macro and use macros in place instead of
> 

As mentioned in [1] I sent that by accident. Please ignore it and sorry for
confusion.

[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/all/7a1a3ac3-10ec-9935-bca1-023cec6c0024@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/