Re: [PATCH v13 5/8] usb:gadget: Add SuperSpeed support to the Gadget Framework

[Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@gmail.com>]

On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 06:02, Tatyana Brokhman wrote:
> +config USB_GADGET_SUPERSPEED
> +       boolean "Gadget operating in Super Speed"

perhaps better phrasing would be: Enable Super Speed support

maybe i didnt look too closely, but it seems like very little even
depends upon this Kconfig option in the actual source.  only the
"gadget_is_superspeed()", and that is used lightly.  so i wonder how
useful this is even having ...

> +                               value = min(w_length, (u16) value);

i know you're just following existing style, but i wonder if these all
shouldnt just be min_t(u16, ...)

> +                               ERROR(cdev, "func_suspend() returned "
> +                                           "error %d\n", value);

please dont split string literals over multiple lines


> +               default:
> +                       break;
> +               }

isnt that the default behavior already ?  so these two lines are pointless ?


> --- a/include/linux/usb/ch9.h
> +++ b/include/linux/usb/ch9.h
> @@ -142,8 +142,6 @@
>  #define USB_DEVICE_LTM_ENABLE  50      /* dev may send LTM */
>  #define USB_INTRF_FUNC_SUSPEND 0       /* function suspend */
>
> -#define USB_INTR_FUNC_SUSPEND_OPT_MASK 0xFF00
> -
>  #define USB_ENDPOINT_HALT              0       /* IN/OUT will STALL */
>
>  /* Bit array elements as returned by the USB_REQ_GET_STATUS request. */

erm, seems unrelated to this patchset ?  did this sneak in by accident ?

> +static inline int gadget_is_superspeed(struct usb_gadget *g)
> +{
> +#ifdef CONFIG_USB_GADGET_SUPERSPEED
> +       /* runtime test would check "g->is_superspeed" ... that might be
> +        * useful to work around hardware bugs, but is mostly pointless
> +        */

multiline comments should read:
  /*
   * foo .....
   */
-mike