Re: [PATCH 1/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: refactor state machine
From: Clemens Ladisch
Date: Thu Mar 03 2016 - 06:38:42 EST
Felipe Ferreri Tonello wrote:
> On 02/03/16 21:09, Clemens Ladisch wrote:
>> Felipe F. Tonello wrote:
>>> This refactor results in a cleaner state machine code
>>
>> It increases the number of states, and now juggles two state variables.
>> I cannot agree to it being cleaner.
>
> Yes, it increases the number of states. That was done in order to
> actually implement a proper finite state machine with one state at a
> time and a transition state.
I know, "clean" is subjective. But in what way was the old state
machine not "proper"?
And how is handling two states (port->state and next_state) cleaner?
As far as I can tell, the requirement for a separate variable comes not
from any inherent complexity of the state machine itself, but only
because the transmit_packet function was inlined.
Regards,
Clemens