Linux CAN drivers development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vincent Mailhol <mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Chen Ni <nichen@iscas.ac.cn>,
	Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>,
	linux-can@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] can: ucan: Use usb_endpoint_type() rather than duplicating its implementation
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2025 00:51:24 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c04376f2-6ab7-4256-8bdc-aa6ff3ea88b4@wanadoo.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0768a008-d4a9-41ec-bc47-1e7c63362296@web.de>

On 25/06/2025 at 14:47, Markus Elfring wrote:
>>>> it seems that Coccinelle missed many simplifications.
>>> Would such software transformations become better supported anyhow?
>> Maybe?
>>
>> I am not involved in the development of Coccinelle and thus, I don't have an answer.
> 
> This can be fine (in principle).
> 
> 
>> Nor do I have the time to read and understand the Coccinelle source code
>> to which you pointed me to.
> 
> I hope that more users can become interested in presented information.
> I would appreciate if knowledge representations can be improved also for
> better automatic data processing and corresponding transformations.

A real quick search shows me that this ucan driver is not an isolated case. Here
is an example:

https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.16-rc3/source/drivers/media/rc/imon.c#L2137-L2148

But it does not seem to occur so often either. So not sure what is the best: do
a manual hunt or write a coccinelle checker. I let you be judge here.

>> My stance is that such static analyzers should never be trusted 100%.
> 
> This is generally fine.
> 
> 
>> The output is more an indicator.
> 
> This is usual.
> 
> 
>>                       And in this present case, a quick review made it very
>> clear that Coccinelle saw one simplification but missed two other ones.
> 
> Would you find another source code adjustment (like the following) more appropriate?

Yes. What you are proposing below is aligned with my initial comments.

> diff --git a/drivers/net/can/usb/ucan.c b/drivers/net/can/usb/ucan.c
> index 07406daf7c88..6c6cee3895c6 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/can/usb/ucan.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/can/usb/ucan.c
> @@ -1352,17 +1352,12 @@ static int ucan_probe(struct usb_interface *intf,
>  	for (i = 0; i < iface_desc->desc.bNumEndpoints; i++) {
>  		ep = &iface_desc->endpoint[i].desc;
>  
> -		if (((ep->bEndpointAddress & USB_ENDPOINT_DIR_MASK) != 0) &&
> -		    ((ep->bmAttributes & USB_ENDPOINT_XFERTYPE_MASK) ==
> -		     USB_ENDPOINT_XFER_BULK)) {
> +		if (usb_endpoint_dir_in(ep) && usb_endpoint_xfer_bulk(ep)) {
>  			/* In Endpoint */
                           ^^^^^^^^^^^
Maybe just remove this comment. After migrating to usb_endpoint_dir_in(ep), this
comment is just paraphrasing the code and has no more reasons to stay.

>  			in_ep_addr = ep->bEndpointAddress;
>  			in_ep_addr &= USB_ENDPOINT_NUMBER_MASK;
>  			in_ep_size = le16_to_cpu(ep->wMaxPacketSize);
> -		} else if (((ep->bEndpointAddress & USB_ENDPOINT_DIR_MASK) ==
> -			    0) &&
> -			   ((ep->bmAttributes & USB_ENDPOINT_XFERTYPE_MASK) ==
> -			    USB_ENDPOINT_XFER_BULK)) {
> +		} else if (usb_endpoint_dir_out(ep) && usb_endpoint_xfer_bulk(ep)) {
>  			/* Out Endpoint */
                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^
Same.

>  			out_ep_addr = ep->bEndpointAddress;
>  			out_ep_addr &= USB_ENDPOINT_NUMBER_MASK;
> 
> 
> Can the functions “usb_endpoint_is_bulk_in” and “usb_endpoint_is_bulk_out”
> be applied here?
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.16-rc3/source/include/uapi/linux/usb/ch9.h#L572-L595

Further simplification, nice :)

I didn't see that last one, so glad you found what seems to be the optimal solution!


Yours sincerely,
Vincent Mailhol


  reply	other threads:[~2025-06-25 15:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-24 17:12 [PATCH] can: ucan: Use usb_endpoint_type() rather than duplicating its implementation Markus Elfring
2025-06-24 17:29 ` Vincent Mailhol
2025-06-24 18:28   ` Markus Elfring
2025-06-24 22:59     ` Vincent Mailhol
2025-06-25  5:47       ` [PATCH] " Markus Elfring
2025-06-25 15:51         ` Vincent Mailhol [this message]
2025-06-25 16:23           ` Markus Elfring
2025-06-26  2:47             ` Vincent Mailhol
2025-06-26  7:22               ` Markus Elfring
2025-06-26  9:23                 ` Vincent Mailhol
2025-06-26 14:46                   ` [PATCH v2] can: ucan: Use two USB endpoint API functions rather than duplicating their implementations Markus Elfring
2025-06-26 14:50                     ` Vincent Mailhol
2025-06-26 15:06                     ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2025-06-26 15:17                       ` [v2] " Markus Elfring
2025-06-24 19:21   ` [PATCH] can: ucan: Use usb_endpoint_type() rather than duplicating its implementation Markus Elfring
2025-06-24 23:03     ` Vincent Mailhol

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=c04376f2-6ab7-4256-8bdc-aa6ff3ea88b4@wanadoo.fr \
    --to=mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr \
    --cc=Markus.Elfring@web.de \
    --cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-can@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mkl@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=nichen@iscas.ac.cn \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox