drivers/net/can/usb/ucan.c | 12 ++---------- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2025 08:56:51 +0200
* Reuse existing functionality from usb_endpoint_is_bulk_in()
and usb_endpoint_is_bulk_out() instead of keeping duplicate source code.
* Omit two comment lines which became redundant with this refactoring.
The source code was transformed by using the Coccinelle software.
Reviewed-by: Vincent Mailhol <mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
---
V3:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-can/20250626-opalescent-tireless-locust-564d48-mkl@pengutronix.de/
* Use an other email address for the tag “Signed-off-by”.
* Provide the patch version not as a direct reply to a development discussion.
V2:
Further change possibilities were taken better into account for
the USB endpoint API with the help of Vincent Mailhol.
drivers/net/can/usb/ucan.c | 12 ++----------
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/can/usb/ucan.c b/drivers/net/can/usb/ucan.c
index 07406daf7c88..0935a9b540d6 100644
--- a/drivers/net/can/usb/ucan.c
+++ b/drivers/net/can/usb/ucan.c
@@ -1351,19 +1351,11 @@ static int ucan_probe(struct usb_interface *intf,
out_ep_size = 0;
for (i = 0; i < iface_desc->desc.bNumEndpoints; i++) {
ep = &iface_desc->endpoint[i].desc;
-
- if (((ep->bEndpointAddress & USB_ENDPOINT_DIR_MASK) != 0) &&
- ((ep->bmAttributes & USB_ENDPOINT_XFERTYPE_MASK) ==
- USB_ENDPOINT_XFER_BULK)) {
- /* In Endpoint */
+ if (usb_endpoint_is_bulk_in(ep)) {
in_ep_addr = ep->bEndpointAddress;
in_ep_addr &= USB_ENDPOINT_NUMBER_MASK;
in_ep_size = le16_to_cpu(ep->wMaxPacketSize);
- } else if (((ep->bEndpointAddress & USB_ENDPOINT_DIR_MASK) ==
- 0) &&
- ((ep->bmAttributes & USB_ENDPOINT_XFERTYPE_MASK) ==
- USB_ENDPOINT_XFER_BULK)) {
- /* Out Endpoint */
+ } else if (usb_endpoint_is_bulk_out(ep)) {
out_ep_addr = ep->bEndpointAddress;
out_ep_addr &= USB_ENDPOINT_NUMBER_MASK;
out_ep_size = le16_to_cpu(ep->wMaxPacketSize);
--
2.50.0On 28/06/2025 at 16:19, Markus Elfring wrote: > From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> > Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2025 08:56:51 +0200 Your patch doesn't pass the ./script/checkpath.pl script :( WARNING: From:/Signed-off-by: email address mismatch: 'From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>' != 'Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>' total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 0 checks, 21 lines checked Please use the same email address: - To send the patch - For the patch author - For the Signed-off-by tag > * Reuse existing functionality from usb_endpoint_is_bulk_in() > and usb_endpoint_is_bulk_out() instead of keeping duplicate source code. > > * Omit two comment lines which became redundant with this refactoring. > > The source code was transformed by using the Coccinelle software. > > Reviewed-by: Vincent Mailhol <mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr> > Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de> Yours sincerely, Vincent Mailhol
> Please use the same email address: You may omit the header specification “From:” (if you would find other presented information acceptable), don't you? What does hinder you to support additional email addresses better? Regards, Markus
On 29/06/2025 at 16:51, Markus Elfring wrote: >> Please use the same email address: > > You may omit the header specification “From:” (if you would find other presented > information acceptable), don't you? You are sending a patch which has some checkpatch warnings and you think it is our duty to fix your mistakes? This is not how it works. > What does hinder you to support additional email addresses better? It is your behaviour and your unwillingness to follow the guidance from the maintainers which hinders me. Use whatever e-mail address you want, but if you fancy mixing different e-mail addresses, then just stop posting. I do not want to waste any more time arguing with you. Nacked-by: Vincent Mailhol <mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr> (no need to reply to this thread, I will not read your post anymore). Yours sincerely, Vincent Mailhol
> … Use whatever e-mail address you want, but if you > fancy mixing different e-mail addresses, then just stop posting. See also: Markus_Elfring@Sonne:…/Projekte/Linux/next-analyses> git log --oneline --author=elfring@users.sourceforge.net | wc -l 1263 Regards, Markus
>>> Please use the same email address: >> >> You may omit the header specification “From:” (if you would find other presented >> information acceptable), don't you? > > You are sending a patch which has some checkpatch warnings A special warning was mentioned. > and you think it is > our duty to fix your mistakes? It depends … There can different views occur according to such communication aspects. > This is not how it works. See also: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.16-rc3#n513 https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch/2.48.0#Documentation/git-format-patch.txt---from Regards, Markus
© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.