Hello everyone,
While looking at the usb_string_id() two things stroke me as odd:
#v+
int __init usb_string_id(struct usb_composite_dev *cdev)
{
if (cdev->next_string_id < 254) {
/* string id 0 is reserved */
cdev->next_string_id++;
return cdev->next_string_id;
}
return -ENODEV;
}
#v-
1. The ID 255 will never be assigned. Is it intended or a bug?
2. 'next_string_id' name is not really appropriate since it does not
store an ID of a *next* string but *last* sting. It should rather
read 'last_string_id', shouldn't it?
I'm also partially because, those changes may be incorporated in my patch
that I submitted earlier today which proposes usb_string_ids_* functions.
--
Best regards, _ _
| Humble Liege of Serenely Enlightened Majesty of o' \,=./ `o
| Computer Science, Michał "mina86" Nazarewicz (o o)
+----[mina86*mina86.com]---[mina86*jabber.org]----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
