Re: [PATCH 1/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: refactor state machine

Felipe Ferreri Tonello wrote: > On March 4, 2016 8:07:40 AM GMT+00:00, Clemens Ladisch > wrote: >> Felipe Ferreri Tonello wrote: >>> On 03/03/16 11:38, Clemens Ladisch wrote: But in what way was the old state machine not "proper"? >>> >>> Because it didn't reflect all

Re: [PATCH 1/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: refactor state machine

Felipe Ferreri Tonello wrote: > On March 4, 2016 8:07:40 AM GMT+00:00, Clemens Ladisch > wrote: >> Felipe Ferreri Tonello wrote: >>> On 03/03/16 11:38, Clemens Ladisch wrote: But in what way was the old state machine not "proper"? >>> >>> Because it didn't reflect all the correct and

Re: [PATCH 1/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: refactor state machine

Hi Clemens, On March 4, 2016 8:07:40 AM GMT+00:00, Clemens Ladisch wrote: >Felipe Ferreri Tonello wrote: >> On 03/03/16 11:38, Clemens Ladisch wrote: >>> But in what way was the old state machine not "proper"? >> >> Because it didn't reflect all the correct and possible

Re: [PATCH 1/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: refactor state machine

Hi Clemens, On March 4, 2016 8:07:40 AM GMT+00:00, Clemens Ladisch wrote: >Felipe Ferreri Tonello wrote: >> On 03/03/16 11:38, Clemens Ladisch wrote: >>> But in what way was the old state machine not "proper"? >> >> Because it didn't reflect all the correct and possible MIDI states > >The

Re: [PATCH 1/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: refactor state machine

Felipe Ferreri Tonello wrote: > On 03/03/16 11:38, Clemens Ladisch wrote: >> But in what way was the old state machine not "proper"? > > Because it didn't reflect all the correct and possible MIDI states The whole point of the one-byte real-time messages is that they do not affect the parsing of

Re: [PATCH 1/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: refactor state machine

Felipe Ferreri Tonello wrote: > On 03/03/16 11:38, Clemens Ladisch wrote: >> But in what way was the old state machine not "proper"? > > Because it didn't reflect all the correct and possible MIDI states The whole point of the one-byte real-time messages is that they do not affect the parsing of

Re: [PATCH 1/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: refactor state machine

Hi Clemens, On 03/03/16 11:38, Clemens Ladisch wrote: > 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

Re: [PATCH 1/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: refactor state machine

Hi Clemens, On 03/03/16 11:38, Clemens Ladisch wrote: > 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

Re: [PATCH 1/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: refactor state machine

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

Re: [PATCH 1/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: refactor state machine

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

Re: [PATCH 1/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: refactor state machine

Hi Clemens, 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.

Re: [PATCH 1/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: refactor state machine

Hi Clemens, 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.

Re: [PATCH 1/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: refactor state machine

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. > and as a result fixed a bug when packaging a USB-MIDI packet right after > a non-conformant MIDI byte

Re: [PATCH 1/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: refactor state machine

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. > and as a result fixed a bug when packaging a USB-MIDI packet right after > a non-conformant MIDI byte