From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAA03C7EE22 for ; Thu, 11 May 2023 07:43:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S237567AbjEKHnO (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 May 2023 03:43:14 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48240 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S237535AbjEKHnH (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 May 2023 03:43:07 -0400 Received: from viti.kaiser.cx (viti.kaiser.cx [IPv6:2a01:238:43fe:e600:cd0c:bd4a:7a3:8e9f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 992F210FD; Thu, 11 May 2023 00:43:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from martin by viti.kaiser.cx with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1px0x2-0005kb-GR; Thu, 11 May 2023 09:43:00 +0200 Date: Thu, 11 May 2023 09:43:00 +0200 From: Martin Kaiser To: Herbert Xu Cc: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] hwrng: imx-rngc - use bitfield macros to read fifo level Message-ID: <20230511074300.ocfrmynne7e6wdkj@viti.kaiser.cx> References: <20230427185357.923412-1-martin@kaiser.cx> <20230427185357.923412-2-martin@kaiser.cx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Sender: Martin Kaiser Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Thus wrote Herbert Xu (herbert@gondor.apana.org.au): > On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 08:53:55PM +0200, Martin Kaiser wrote: > > @@ -133,9 +133,7 @@ static int imx_rngc_read(struct hwrng *rng, void *data, size_t max, bool wait) > > break; > > /* how many random numbers are in FIFO? [0-16] */ > > - level = (status & RNGC_STATUS_FIFO_LEVEL_MASK) >> > > - RNGC_STATUS_FIFO_LEVEL_SHIFT; > > - > > + level = FIELD_GET(RNGC_STATUS_FIFO_LEVEL, status); > Wouldn't it be simpler to just get rid of the shift? Yes, we're only checking that level > 0, there's no need for the shift. I'll submit a new version of the patch. Thanks, Martin