Re: [PATCH v2] staging: rtl8723bs: Use % 4096 instead of & 0xfff
Samuel Abraham <[email protected]> Sat, 5 Apr 2025 15:55:18 +0100
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.outreachy,dev.linux.lists.linux-staging,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CADYq+fYMPGFdFvNPyo_XoNdMhh6qu=h10Gb2EDc2Jw=JK9iXig@mail.gmail.com> |
On Sat, Apr 5, 2025 at 1:30 PM Julia Lawall <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Sat, 5 Apr 2025, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > On Sat, Apr 5, 2025 at 11:23 AM Greg Kroah-Hartman > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Sat, Apr 05, 2025 at 12:09:59AM +0000, Abraham Samuel Adekunle wrote: > > > > Replace the bitwise AND operator `&` with a modulo > > > > operator `%` and decimal number to make the upper limit visible > > > > and clear what the semantic of it is. > > > > > > Eeek, no. We all "know" what & means (it's a bit mask to handle the > > > issues involved), and we all do NOT know that % will do the same thing > > > at all. > > > > And that is exactly the purpose of the change. The % 4096 makes it > > clearer on what's going on, i.e. we are doing indexes that are wrapped > > around the given number. > > Ah, OK. Samuel, indeed, the log message was going in that direction. But > probably it should be more clear. Why is 4096 the upper limit in this > case, for example. Okay thank you Julia. So I can add something like this to the commit message? "Replace the bitwise AND operator `&` with a modulo operator `%` and decimal number to make the upper limit visible and clear that we are doing indexes that are wrapped around the given number"? You also said I should add a patch for the white space around binary operators. I did it together because the changes were on the same line. Should I still add a second patch for that change? Thanks Adekunle.