Hi,
On 11/22/2016 07:48 AM, Nobuo Iwata wrote:
> Modification to export and un-export response in
> tools/usb/usbip/src/usbip_network.h. It just changes return code type
> from int to uint32_t as same as other responses.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nobuo Iwata <nobuo.iwata@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> tools/usb/usbip/src/usbip_network.h | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/usb/usbip/src/usbip_network.h b/tools/usb/usbip/src/usbip_network.h
> index c1e875c..e1ca86a 100644
> --- a/tools/usb/usbip/src/usbip_network.h
> +++ b/tools/usb/usbip/src/usbip_network.h
> @@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ struct op_export_request {
> } __attribute__((packed));
>
> struct op_export_reply {
> - int returncode;
> + uint32_t returncode;
> } __attribute__((packed));
>
>
> @@ -115,7 +115,7 @@ struct op_unexport_request {
> } __attribute__((packed));
>
> struct op_unexport_reply {
> - int returncode;
> + uint32_t returncode;
> } __attribute__((packed));
>
> #define PACK_OP_UNEXPORT_REQUEST(pack, request) do {\
>
The field name is returncode but we have no suitable defines with
"return codes". I ran through USBIP documentation but didn't find any
list of allowed return codes. Is there any?
You change the value type to unsigned but later you use:
+ if (!error)
+ reply.returncode = 0;
+ else
+ reply.returncode = -1;
It looks a little bit ugly to me that we change the value to be unsigned
and then assign a signed number to it. In addition your compiler is
going to complain if you use -Wconversion flag.
In my opinion we should have suitable defines for error codes and those
code should be documented in protocol documentation.
Best regards
--
Krzysztof Opasiak
Samsung R&D Institute Poland
Samsung Electronics
--
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
