On Thu, 03 Sep 2009 22:49:52 +0200, Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, 31 Aug 2009, [iso-8859-2] Micha³ Nazarewicz wrote:
Removed code that was included when CONFIG_USB_FILE_STORAGE_TEST
was defined. If this functionality is required one may still use
the original File-backed Storage Gadget. It has been agreed that
testing functionality is not required in the composite function.
Also, removed fsg_suspend() and fsg_resume() functions since
they were no operations.
+#define STORAGE_BUFLEN ((u32)16384)
Evidently this is a matter of taste. To me, 16384u would look much
better.
I wanted to stress out it's "u32" and not just "unsigned". Ie. I
didn't want to bother checking how u32 is defined an all possible
architectures and so on and I'm sure no one else will. ;)
+eopnotsupp:
VSDBG(fsg,
- "unknown class-specific control req "
- "%02x.%02x v%04x i%04x l%u\n",
- ctrl->bRequestType, ctrl->bRequest,
- le16_to_cpu(ctrl->wValue), w_index, w_length);
+ "unknown class-specific control req "
+ "%02x.%02x v%04x i%04x l%u\n",
+ ctrl->bRequestType, ctrl->bRequest,
+ le16_to_cpu(ctrl->wValue), w_index, w_length);
Why bother to change the indentation style?
Well, previously it was VDBG macro and arguments were nicely aligned.
However, after changing to VSDBG alignment was broken, so I fixed it.
Anyhow, after noticing that change of the name is not required at all
(VDBG can remain VDBG; see comments for 01/11 for details) the fix
won't be needed any more. I'll take care of it.
--
Best regards, _ _
.o. | Liege of Serenly Enlightened Majesty of o' \,=./ `o
..o | Computer Science, Michał "mina86" Nazarewicz (o o)
ooo +-<m.nazarewicz@xxxxxxxxxxx>-<mina86@xxxxxxxxxx>-ooO--(_)--Ooo--
--
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
