Em Thu, 3 Aug 2006 08:27:34 -0700 Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu:
| On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 11:11:07AM -0300, Luiz Fernando N. Capitulino wrote: | > Well, this will lead to the following duplication in the USB drivers: | > | > if (usb_endpoint_is_in(...) && usb_endpoint_is_bulk(...)) | > | > Then someone will ask us to merge them. :) | | Like me, before you even get this finished :) :) | > __usb_endpoint_is_in() | > __usb_endpoint_is_out() | > __usb_endpoint_is_bulk() | > __usb_endpoint_is_int() | | Why the __ crud? Just make them be like the other functions. Because they're low-level, they access the struct usb_endpoint_descriptor members directly. | > usb_endpoint_is_bulk_in() | > usb_endpoint_is_bulk_out() | > usb_endpoint_is_int_in() | > usb_endpoint_is_int_out() | > | > Which is flexible, is still good, but looks too much macros to me. | | No, you only added 4 more, which could be used in places. I like this | much better (without the __ stuff) Ok. | > Oh, BTW, I didn't add a macro to check isochronous endpoints because | > they're not so common in USB driver's code. But if we're going to make | > the API complete, I think we should add it. | | Yes, it would only be 2 more inline functions. Ok then. -- Luiz Fernando N. Capitulino ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ [email protected] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
