On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 03:53:58PM +0300, Eugene Korenevsky wrote:
> Rework smelling code (goto inside compound statement). Perhaps this is
> legacy. Anyway such code is not appropriate for Linux kernel.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eugene Korenevsky <ekorenevsky@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Changes in v5: make `bool` a return type of `hub_check_descriptor_sanity()`
> Changes in v4: fix typo
> Changes in v3: extract the code to static function
> Changes in v2: fix spaces instead of tab, add missing 'Signed-off-by'
>
> drivers/usb/core/hub.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++-----------------
> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/core/hub.c b/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
> index cbb1467..1a316a1 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
> @@ -1722,10 +1722,25 @@ static void hub_disconnect(struct usb_interface *intf)
> kref_put(&hub->kref, hub_release);
> }
>
> +static bool hub_check_descriptor_sanity(struct usb_host_interface *desc)
> +{
> + /* Some hubs have a subclass of 1, which AFAICT according to the */
> + /* specs is not defined, but it works */
> + if (desc->desc.bInterfaceSubClass != 0 &&
> + desc->desc.bInterfaceSubClass != 1)
> + return false;
> +
> + /* Multiple endpoints? What kind of mutant ninja-hub is this? */
> + if (desc->desc.bNumEndpoints != 1)
> + return false;
> +
> + /* If it's not an interrupt in endpoint, we'd better punt! */
> + return usb_endpoint_is_int_in(&desc->endpoint[0].desc) != 0;
Ok, I'm going to be really pedantic here and ask that you spell this
last statement out:
if (usb...)
return true;
return false;
thanks,
greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
