On Wed, 26 Oct 2016 17:22:50 +0300
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpen...@oracle.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 05:44:20PM +0200, Christian Gromm wrote:
> > From: Andrey Shvetsov <andrey.shvet...@k2l.de>
> > 
> > This patch puts the synchronization procedure trigger for asynchronous
> > channels into the function hdm_configure_channel. Likewise, it removes
> > triggering of hardware specific synchronization for other channel types
> > from the probe function as it is not required.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Andrey Shvetsov <andrey.shvet...@k2l.de>
> > Signed-off-by: Christian Gromm <christian.gr...@microchip.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/staging/most/hdm-usb/hdm_usb.c | 17 +++++++++--------
> >  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/most/hdm-usb/hdm_usb.c 
> > b/drivers/staging/most/hdm-usb/hdm_usb.c
> > index 1a630e1..db11930 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/most/hdm-usb/hdm_usb.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/most/hdm-usb/hdm_usb.c
> > @@ -695,6 +695,15 @@ static int hdm_configure_channel(struct most_interface 
> > *iface, int channel,
> >                       - conf->buffer_size;
> >  exit:
> >     mdev->conf[channel] = *conf;
> > +   if (conf->data_type == MOST_CH_ASYNC) {
> > +           u16 ep = mdev->ep_address[channel];
> > +           int err = drci_wr_reg(mdev->usb_device,
> > +                                 DRCI_REG_BASE + DRCI_COMMAND + ep * 16,
> > +                                 1);
> > +
> > +           if (err < 0)
> > +                   dev_warn(dev, "sync for ep%02x failed", ep);
> > +   }
> >     return 0;
> 
> This code is weird, because we goto exit without checking the
> frame_size.  It looks like it doesn't matter much but it's sort of
> puzzling what's going on.  There weren't any comments to explain it.
> 

The frame size is only needed if we are dealing with synchronous and
(in some cases) isochronous data. So you're right, the variable
frame_size is _not_ needed in case we be jumping to the 'exit' label
and hence, not being checked.

Haven't had the feeling that this is worth a comment. It isn't easy
to decide what needs a comment and what does not anyway. Then I would
probably also have to explain why we jump to 'exit' if we have
isochronous data and a packet_per_transaction value unequal to 0xff.
(I don't expect anyone to understand what this is supposed mean, unless
he is familiar with the network interface controller.)

So, let me know if a comment on the frame_size usage can fix the
confusion.

regards,
Chris

> regards,
> dan carpenter
> 

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel

Reply via email to