Hi Felipe and Petr,
On Tuesday 28 Mar 2017 16:48:46 Felipe Balbi wrote:
> Petr Cvek <petr.cvek@xxxxxx> writes:
> > Dne 7.3.2017 v 06:58 Laurent Pinchart napsal(a):
> >> On Tuesday 07 Mar 2017 00:57:20 Petr Cvek wrote:
> >>> Commit 76e0da34c7ce ("usb-gadget/uvc: use per-attribute show and store
> >>> methods") caused a stringification of an undefined macro argument
> >>> "aname", so three UVC parameters (streaming_interval,
> >>> streaming_maxpacket and streaming_maxburst) were named "aname".
> >>>
> >>> Add the definition of "aname" to the main macro and name the filenames
> >>> as originaly intended.
> >>
> >> Why don't you just
> >>
> >> - UVC_ATTR(f_uvc_opts_, cname, aname)
> >> + UVC_ATTR(f_uvc_opts_, cname, cname)
> >>
> >> in the definition of the UVCG_OPTS_ATTR() macro ?
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > In a fact I did it for my first testing version. But then I realized
> > two things. First one is that someone may want to rename these three
> > files (now or in the future). The second one is that this bug was
> > caused by original author, who probably assumed the UVCG_OPTS_ATTR
> > macro had "aname" argument as others UVCG_* macros and didn't check. I
> > assumed that too and only after I saw three "aname" files with the
> > same path I realized where is the problem.
> >
> > So it's more like a human error prone type of a code. But if you think
> > "cname" is enough I can send PATCH v2.
I think it would be, otherwise we end up passing the same argument twice,
which seems a bit useless to me. If we ever need to rename those files we can
always change the code later.
It's no big deal, but I have a preference for my proposal.
> Laurent, any comments?
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
--
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
