On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 12:16:59PM +0530, Himadri Pandya wrote:
> The new usb_control_msg_send() nicely wraps usb_control_msg() with proper
> error check. Hence use the wrapper instead of calling usb_control_msg()
> directly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Himadri Pandya <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/usb/serial/ipaq.c | 9 ++++-----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/serial/ipaq.c b/drivers/usb/serial/ipaq.c
> index f81746c3c26c..99505a76035d 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/serial/ipaq.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/serial/ipaq.c
> @@ -530,15 +530,14 @@ static int ipaq_open(struct tty_struct *tty,
> */
> while (retries) {
> retries--;
> - result = usb_control_msg(serial->dev,
> - usb_sndctrlpipe(serial->dev, 0), 0x22, 0x21,
> - 0x1, 0, NULL, 0, 100);
> - if (!result)
> + result = usb_control_msg_send(serial->dev, 0, 0x22, 0x21, 0x1,
> + 0, NULL, 0, 100, GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (result == 0)
> break;
There's not point in using the new helper since there's no data stage
and usb_control_msg already returns negative errno or 0.
> msleep(1000);
> }
> - if (!retries && result) {
> + if (result) {
> dev_err(&port->dev, "%s - failed doing control urb, error %d\n",
> __func__, result);
> return result;
This looks like just an unrelated simplification of the logic; there was
never any need to check !retries here. You can send that as a clean up
patch of its own if you want.
Johan
