Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 7/7] net: hsr: use BIT() macro for bit shift constant

From: Felix Maurer <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2026 17:26:09 +0100

On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 03:46:30PM +0100, [email-masked] wrote:
> From: Luka Gejak <[email-masked]>
>
> Replace the explicit bit shift (1 << HSR_SEQ_BLOCK_SHIFT) with the
> standardized BIT() macro for defining HSR_SEQ_BLOCK_SIZE. This improves
> readability and aligns with kernel coding conventions.

I know that checkpatch suggests this, but I don't agree with it:
HSR_SEQ_BLOCK_SHIFT is not a bitmap but a number, so in my opinion the
BIT() macro makes this particular define harder to read/understand.

> Signed-off-by: Luka Gejak <[email-masked]>
> ---
>  net/hsr/hsr_framereg.h | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/hsr/hsr_framereg.h b/net/hsr/hsr_framereg.h
> index c65ecb925734..cb731ee0ce5c 100644
> --- a/net/hsr/hsr_framereg.h
> +++ b/net/hsr/hsr_framereg.h
> @@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ struct hsr_seq_block *hsr_get_seq_block(struct hsr_node *node, u16 block_idx);
>  #endif
>
>  #define HSR_SEQ_BLOCK_SHIFT 7 /* 128 bits */
> -#define HSR_SEQ_BLOCK_SIZE (1 << HSR_SEQ_BLOCK_SHIFT)
> +#define HSR_SEQ_BLOCK_SIZE BIT(HSR_SEQ_BLOCK_SHIFT)
>  #define HSR_SEQ_BLOCK_MASK (HSR_SEQ_BLOCK_SIZE - 1)
>  #define HSR_MAX_SEQ_BLOCKS 64
>
> --
> 2.53.0
>