Re: [PATCH v5] usb: gadget: storage: make FSG_NUM_BUFFERS variable size

[Per Forlin]

2011/8/19 Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Fri, 19 Aug 2011 16:28:25 +0200, Per Forlin <per.forlin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>>
>> @@ -3605,6 +3608,9 @@ static int __init fsg_init(void)
>>        int             rc;
>>        struct fsg_dev  *fsg;
>> +       if (!FSG_NUM_BUFFERS_IS_VALID(fsg_num_buffers))
>
> Care to add pr_err() here?  Or better yet, change fsg_num_buffers_is_valid()
> to a function, eg.:
>
> static inline int fsg_num_buffers_validate()
> {
>        if (fsg_num_buffers && fsg_num_buffers <= 4)
>                return 0;
>        pr_err("fsg_num_buffers too high: %u\n", fsg_num_buffers);
>        return -EINVAL;
> }
>
Look good.
This will permit only 1 buffer to be used. Is this intentionally? I'm
fine with it.
In Kconfig the range is 2 to 4. For debug purposes there may be a
point of permitting range 1 to 4.

>> +               return -EINVAL;
>> +
>>        if ((rc = fsg_alloc()) != 0)
>>                return rc;
>>        fsg = the_fsg;
>
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/mass_storage.c
>> b/drivers/usb/gadget/mass_storage.c
>> index d3eb274..fa6dedf 100644
>> --- a/drivers/usb/gadget/mass_storage.c
>> +++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/mass_storage.c
>> @@ -179,6 +179,9 @@ MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
>> static int __init msg_init(void)
>>  {
>> +       if (!FSG_NUM_BUFFERS_IS_VALID(fsg_num_buffers))
>> +               return -EINVAL;
>> +
>>        return usb_composite_probe(&msg_driver, msg_bind);
>>  }
>>  module_init(msg_init);
>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/multi.c b/drivers/usb/gadget/multi.c
>> index 8c7b747..5f146da 100644
>> --- a/drivers/usb/gadget/multi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/multi.c
>> @@ -360,6 +360,9 @@ static struct usb_composite_driver multi_driver = {
>> static int __init multi_init(void)
>>  {
>> +       if (!FSG_NUM_BUFFERS_IS_VALID(fsg_num_buffers))
>> +               return -EINVAL;
>> +
>>        return usb_composite_probe(&multi_driver, multi_bind);
>>  }
>>  module_init(multi_init);
>
> I'd move the check from those two places to fsg_common_init().
>
good point.

>
> Other then the above minor comments and buffers never being freed in
> f_mass_storage.c, the code looks good to me.
>
I'll fix these and send out a new version.

Many thanks,
Per
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/