On Friday, September 17, 2021 4:44:17 PM CEST Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 09:18:33AM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote: > > Clean up usbctrl_vendoreq() in usb_ops_linux.c. > > > > List of changes: > > > > 1) Rename variables: > > pdata => data > > pio_priv => io_priv > > pintfhdl => intfhdl > > wvalue => address. > > 2) Reorder variables declarations according to the "Reverse Xmas Tree" > > style. > > 3) Remove unnecessary test for "!pIo_buf". > > 4) Move comments one line below code. > > 5) Remove unnecessary excess parentheses. > > 6) Remove unnecessary extra spaces. > > 7) Remove unnecessary comments. > > 8) Fix grammar errors (checksumed => checksummed). > > When you find yourself listing all of the different things you have done > in a single commit, that is a HUGE hint that you need to break this up > into smaller pieces. > > Please do so here, this should not be just one change, as it's almost > impossible to look at this and "know" it's all still the same logic > happening here. But if you had broken this down into 8 different > changes, then it would have been obvious and I could easily have applied > the changes. Dear Greg, My first thought when I read you message was to simply delete this patch because usbctrl_vendorreq() is going to be deleted in 18/19. But then I rethought of the original purpose behind this patch and (after talking with Pavel) we decided to do the task you asked and split this patch into 8 smaller ones. The only reason is because, as you noticed, we "[]are moving code around", so, although I'm not required to clean up code in usbctrl_vendorreq(), I'm required to make the new usb_read() and usb_write() the cleaner the possible. This preventive clean up helps me a lot. Obviously I guess that I'm required to split also the next patch of this series in 3 because there are also there 3 different kind of clean-ups. So, we'll have a total of 11 clean-ups. > > I've taken the first 14 patches in this series, it's great work, thank > you all for doing this. Thanks to you for the "great work". We appreciated it. > But this, and the remaining patches in here > need to be split up more to make it obvious that the changes are correct > and should be accepted. Please feel free to start the numbering of the > patch series over now, given that the first 14 are now merged into my > tree. We're working on this. Thanks, Fabio > > thanks, > > greg k-h >
