may I commit this small umodem patch ?
Gary Jennejohn
gary.jennejohn at freenet.de
Thu Jul 3 15:07:04 UTC 2008
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:07:19 +0200
Luigi Rizzo <rizzo at icir.org> wrote:
> There was a discussion back in september about adding
> support for basic CDC tty devices in umodem.c.
> This lets you talk to a number of usb devices built around
> microcontrollers (e.g. Atmel), and puts us on par with
> Linux and Windows in terms of supporting these devices.
>
> Because this simply requires the small patch below to the
> probe/attach routine, so if there are no objections I plan to add
> this to the system (CURRENT then RELENG_7 and RELENG_6) in the next
> few days.
>
> > Index: umodem.c
> > ===================================================================
> > RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/dev/usb/umodem.c,v
> > retrieving revision 1.57
> > diff -u -r1.57 umodem.c
> > --- umodem.c 31 Jan 2005 13:58:10 -0000 1.57
> > +++ umodem.c 20 Aug 2006 17:05:34 -0000
> > @@ -256,6 +260,15 @@
> > id->bInterfaceProtocol == UIPROTO_CDC_AT)
> > ret = UMATCH_IFACECLASS_IFACESUBCLASS_IFACEPROTO;
> >
> > +#if 1
> > + if (ret == UMATCH_NONE &&
> > + id->bInterfaceClass == UICLASS_CDC_DATA &&
> > + id->bInterfaceSubClass == UISUBCLASS_DATA &&
> > + id->bInterfaceProtocol == 0x00)
> > + ret = UMATCH_IFACECLASS_IFACESUBCLASS_IFACEPROTO;
> > + return ret;
> > +#endif
> > +
> > if (ret == UMATCH_NONE)
> > return (ret);
>
Is there any reason to keep the #if 1 ... #endif? And why not just
directly return UMATCH_IFACECLASS_IFACESUBCLASS_IFACEPROTO rather than
assigning it to ret first?
---
Gary Jennejohn (gj at freebsd.org)
More information about the freebsd-usb
mailing list