Citeren Charles Lepple <[email protected]>:
It looks like the code path (if ETIME is not defined) is to fall
through to a USB reset if -EPIPE happens, and usb_clear_halt() does
not succeed.
Is this intentional, or should the #endif be after the block which
calls usb_reset()?
It is intentional. The call to usb_clear_halt() usually does the job,
but on some older FreeBSD versions this function is not implemented.
In that case, calling usb_reset() might be helpful before reconnecting.
(I understand that after a usb_reset(), the code needs to fall
through to the usb->close() section since the device handle is no
longer valid.)
Yes. Whether or not a call to usb_close() is needed might be platform
dependent though (I'm not completely sure about that).
I guess it's a personal preference of mine, but I think that any
code that relies on falling off the end of a switch case (instead of
ending with 'break') should have a brief comment to that effect.
I will need to make a couple of updates to the comments anyway. I'll
take this into account.
Best regards, Arjen
--
Please keep list traffic on the list
_______________________________________________
Nut-upsdev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsdev
