From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756420AbaIIKUe (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Sep 2014 06:20:34 -0400 Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk ([106.187.55.193]:58680 "EHLO mezzanine.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756033AbaIIKUc (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Sep 2014 06:20:32 -0400 Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2014 11:19:54 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: jiwang Cc: Liam Girdwood , Jaroslav Kysela , Takashi Iwai , "Frkuska, Joshua" , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20140909101954.GO2601@sirena.org.uk> References: <540EBC14.6090002@mentor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="tzZdJ4yHDV5r1Akt" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <540EBC14.6090002@mentor.com> X-Cookie: Exercise caution in your daily affairs. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 109.152.174.147 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: broonie@sirena.org.uk Subject: Re: question about two ASoC commits X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mezzanine.sirena.org.uk) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --tzZdJ4yHDV5r1Akt Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 05:36:36PM +0900, jiwang wrote: > Can anyone tell me what is the reasoning of the following two commits > commit: 5d16333 ASoC: SND_SOC_DAIFMT_NB_NF become 0 as default settings > commit: eef28e1 ASoC: SND_SOC_DAIFMT_GATED become 0 as default settings > with these two commits, now we have > #define SND_SOC_DAIFMT_GATED (0 << 4) > #define SND_SOC_DAIFMT_NB_NF (0 << 8) > in soc-dai.h > what's the good to shift 0 with different numbers? > no matter the number, they both equal to 0. > IMO all bit flags which share same variable (in this case SND_SOC_DAIFMT) > should have different value, isn't it? As the commit message says this is so that we have a default value which does something sensible. --tzZdJ4yHDV5r1Akt Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUDtRGAAoJECTWi3JdVIfQA2IH/A8dAfkH0NtNNmcsbp0hPtTN x5jX9TqWHRxm51/MYdFFmcS6PY6bRLv+cNcTBvqNaxpuBzfa/wiwdhIQ/m52cAmw 09Ws/1kX2eQmyhGiykj4bJVUWsXMAEfxcjt7s+TgBMAgQCHWfXuBqqOibY2ZBbuV S2Gx12iggdvj5smdtMww99P6j5owTvbP7qDAaDBXV8YtnmXN4xWWHqGoIVPZJnBI ZGIHwPbR2tiwHbVcQ1R0auSZuTWuebeG2AytHJ9y8tyickUL1TDxdLG1A7WxAfpt b1kFFaUaJAUv9QO8QA5mtyOAYQTlTuRN26TIm0c0JPyDCDocH3h7tkAmueKSXMc= =1OYb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --tzZdJ4yHDV5r1Akt--