>>Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>> @@ -889,6 +887,7 @@ static int lookup_string(
>>> static int get_string(struct usb_composite_dev *cdev,
>>> void *buf, u16 language, int id)
>>> {
>>> + struct usb_composite_driver *cdriver = cdev->driver;
> * Michal Nazarewicz | 2012-08-24 19:09:06 [+0200]:
>>Should you keep the ???composite??? name for the variable, the rest of the
>>patch would be a bit shorter. :)
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Seriously? I have it now consistent within the file. The second series
> which little large would clash here. I would prefer to avoid this if
> possible.
I'm fine either way. If you have a reason to rename the variable,
please do. I'm just pointing that the patch would be smaller if you
wouldn't. :)
--
Best regards, _ _
.o. | Liege of Serenely Enlightened Majesty of o' \,=./ `o
..o | Computer Science, Michał “mina86” Nazarewicz (o o)
ooo +----<email/xmpp: mpn@xxxxxxxxxx>--------------ooO--(_)--Ooo--Attachment:
pgpdW1k2OXTcN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
