From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 13:38:13 +0100
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] usb,
	dfu: extract flush code into seperate function
In-Reply-To: <53214297.2060605@denx.de>
References: <1394618481-9572-1-git-send-email-hs@denx.de>
	<201403121243.35158.marex@denx.de> <53214297.2060605@denx.de>
Message-ID: <201403131338.13731.marex@denx.de>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

On Thursday, March 13, 2014 at 06:31:03 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello Marek,
> 
> Am 12.03.2014 12:43, schrieb Marek Vasut:
> > On Wednesday, March 12, 2014 at 11:01:19 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> >> move the flushing code into an extra function dfu_flush(),
> >> so it can be used from other code.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Heiko Schocher<hs@denx.de>
> >> Cc: Lukasz Majewski<l.majewski@samsung.com>
> >> Cc: Kyungmin Park<kyungmin.park@samsung.com>
> >> Cc: Marek Vasut<marex@denx.de>
> >> ---
> >> 
> >>   drivers/dfu/dfu.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
> >>   include/dfu.h     |  1 +
> >>   2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
> >> 
> >> diff --git a/drivers/dfu/dfu.c b/drivers/dfu/dfu.c
> >> index 56e69fd..193e047 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/dfu/dfu.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/dfu/dfu.c
> >> @@ -127,6 +127,31 @@ static int dfu_write_buffer_drain(struct dfu_entity
> >> *dfu) return ret;
> >> 
> >>   }
> >> 
> >> +int dfu_flush(struct dfu_entity *dfu, void *buf, int size, int
> >> blk_seq_num) +{
> >> +	int ret = 0;
> >> +
> >> +	/* end? */
> > 
> > What does this comment mean ? I don't understand it ...
> 
> Comes from original code... Thinking about it, it seems better to
> let this comment and the below "if" in the dfu_write function...
> 
> >> +	if (size == 0) {
> > 
> > You can check this like so:
> > 
> > if (size)
> > 
> >    return;
> 
> ... as when moving this "if" back to dfu_write(), this "if" kindly
> disappears in the patch 2/3 of this series, as calling dfu_flush()
> is only in the new dfuMANIFEST state necessary, which is called at
> the end of the dfu transfer, so no need for checking, if end of
> size is reached!

OK, this makes sense. Thanks for pointing this out.