Quoting "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsi...@embeddedor.com>:

Hi Alan,

Quoting Alan Stern <st...@rowland.harvard.edu>:

On Tue, 21 Feb 2017, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:

Code refactoring to make the flow easier to follow and add missing
'continue' for case USB_ENDPOINT_XFER_INT.

Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1248733
Cc: Alan Stern <st...@rowland.harvard.edu>
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <garsi...@embeddedor.com>
---
drivers/usb/misc/usbtest.c | 50 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/usb/misc/usbtest.c b/drivers/usb/misc/usbtest.c
index 3525626..8723e33 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/misc/usbtest.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/misc/usbtest.c
@@ -124,6 +124,32 @@ static struct usb_device *testdev_to_usbdev(struct usbtest_dev *test)

/*-------------------------------------------------------------------------*/

+static inline void try_intr(struct usb_host_endpoint *e,
+                           struct usb_host_endpoint *int_in,
+                           struct usb_host_endpoint *int_out)
+{
+       if (usb_endpoint_dir_in(&e->desc)) {
+               if (!int_in)
+                       int_in = e;
+       } else {
+               if (!int_out)
+                       int_out = e;
+       }
+}
+
+static inline void try_iso(struct usb_host_endpoint *e,
+                          struct usb_host_endpoint *iso_in,
+                          struct usb_host_endpoint *iso_out)
+{
+       if (usb_endpoint_dir_in(&e->desc)) {
+               if (!iso_in)
+                       iso_in = e;
+       } else {
+               if (!iso_out)
+                       iso_out = e;
+       }
+}
+

This is not at all what I had in mind.  First, it's incorrect (can you
see why?).  Second, by "inline" I meant moving the code to be actually
in-line next to the conditional, not some place else in a separate
subroutine (even if the subroutine is declared inline).


Interesting... let me double check.

I thought it would've been better to have separate inline subroutines for those "goto".

Also, the code for the USB_ENDPOINT_XFER_BULK case should look like the
other two.


Do you mean a 'continue' instead of the 'break'?


Oh I see, the following piece of code should be part of the USB_ENDPOINT_XFER_BULK case:

if (usb_endpoint_dir_in(&e->desc)) {
        if (!in)
                in = e;
} else {
        if (!out)
                out = e;
}
continue;

--
Gustavo A. R. Silva






Reply via email to