From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262690AbVAKBkz (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jan 2005 20:40:55 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262568AbVAKBkw (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jan 2005 20:40:52 -0500 Received: from mail.kroah.org ([69.55.234.183]:53900 "EHLO perch.kroah.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262690AbVAKBig (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jan 2005 20:38:36 -0500 Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 17:36:01 -0800 From: Greg KH To: Chad Kitching Cc: Pete Zaitcev , linux-usb-devel@lists.sourcefoge.net.kroah.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, laforge@gnumonks.org Subject: Re: My vision of usbmon Message-ID: <20050111013601.GG18697@kroah.com> References: <18DFD6B776308241A200853F3F83D5072851@pl6w2kex.lan.powerlandcomputers.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <18DFD6B776308241A200853F3F83D5072851@pl6w2kex.lan.powerlandcomputers.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Dec 23, 2004 at 03:02:49PM -0600, Chad Kitching wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Greg KH [mailto:greg@kroah.com] > > Sent: December 21, 2004 11:11 PM > > Subject: Re: My vision of usbmon > > > > -/* exported only within usbcore */ > > -struct usb_bus *usb_bus_get (struct usb_bus *bus) > > +struct usb_bus *usb_bus_get(struct usb_bus *bus) > > { > > - struct class_device *tmp; > > - > > - if (!bus) > > - return NULL; > > - > > - tmp = class_device_get(&bus->class_dev); > > - if (tmp) > > - return to_usb_bus(tmp); > > - else > > - return NULL; > > + if (bus) > > + class_device_get(&bus->class_dev); > > + return bus; > > } > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(usb_bus_get); > > I'm not familiar with this code, but if the replacement code is > equivalent, is there any point to the return usb_bus pointer? With > the replacement, you should always get the same pointer you put > into it. If that is the case, why not remove the return value, and > change drivers/usb/core/usb.c to match? Because that goes against the "style" of the _get functions in the driver core. This way, it's easy to just do: some_function(usb_bus_get(my_bus), foo); thanks, greg k-h