Hi Marc,

Il 01/03/2021 14:08 Marc Kleine-Budde [off-list ref] ha scritto:

 
On 01.03.2021 12:38:05, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:

quoted

On 28.02.2021 11:38:54, Dario Binacchi wrote:
[...]

quoted

@@ -730,7 +728,7 @@ static void c_can_do_tx(struct net_device *dev)
 	while ((idx = ffs(pend))) {
 		idx--;
 		pend &= ~(1 << idx);
-		obj = idx + C_CAN_MSG_OBJ_TX_FIRST;
+		obj = idx + priv->msg_obj_tx_first;
 		c_can_inval_tx_object(dev, IF_TX, obj);
 		can_get_echo_skb(dev, idx, NULL);
 		bytes += priv->dlc[idx];

@@ -740,7 +738,7 @@ static void c_can_do_tx(struct net_device *dev)
 	/* Clear the bits in the tx_active mask */
 	atomic_sub(clr, &priv->tx_active);
 
-	if (clr & (1 << (C_CAN_MSG_OBJ_TX_NUM - 1)))
+	if (clr & (1 << (priv->msg_obj_tx_num - 1)))

Do we need 1UL here, too?

There are several more "1 <<" in the driver. As the right side of the
sift operation can be up to 32, I think you should replace all "1 <<"
with "1UL <<".

Do you agree if I use the BIT macro for all these shift operations?

Thanks and regards
Dario

regards,
Marc

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                 | Marc Kleine-Budde           |
Embedded Linux                   | https://www.pengutronix.de  |
Vertretung West/Dortmund         | Phone: +49-231-2826-924     |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |