于 2012/7/24 22:21, Alan Stern 写道:
On Tue, 24 Jul 2012, Lan Tianyu wrote:
@@ -209,10 +209,13 @@ set_avoid_reset_quirk(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
if (sscanf(buf, "%d", &config) != 1 || config < 0 || config > 1)
Please do me a favor: Rename the "config" variable to something else,
such as "morphs" or "val". In USB, the word "config" already has a
separate meaning.
Ok. I will do it. A seperate patch?
return -EINVAL;
usb_lock_device(udev);
- if (config)
+ if (config) {
udev->quirks |= USB_QUIRK_RESET_MORPHS;
- else
+ udev->persist_enabled = 0;
+ } else {
udev->quirks &= ~USB_QUIRK_RESET_MORPHS;
+ udev->persist_enabled = 1;
This line doesn't seem right. What if the user _wants_ persist_enabled
to be 0?
This seems attribute avoid_reset_quirk is conflicted with persist.
From my opinion, avoid_reset_quirk may have high priority.
So we can add a USB_QUIRK_RESET_MORPHS check in the attribute persist
store callback, if USB_QUIRK_RESET_MORPHS flag had been set, persist
couldn't be changed and remain 0 since this patch set persist to 0 when
USB_QUIRK_RESET_MORPHS flag is set. Do this make sense?
+ }
usb_unlock_device(udev);
return count;
}
Alan Stern
--
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
--
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
