Remy Bohmer wrote: > Hi Tom, > > Sorry for not responding to this series very fast, because I wanted to > look into it carefully. > Below my comments on this patch > > 2009/9/28 Tom Rix <tom....@windriver.com>: >> The header files usb.h and usbdescriptors.h have the same or >> similarly named structure definitions for >> >> usb_device_descriptor >> usb_string_descriptor >> usb_endpoint_descriptor >> usb_config_descriptor vs usb_configuration_descriptor >> usb_interface_descriptor >> >> There should only be one definition of these structures. > > True, I agree with that. > >> Some of these structures are element-wise duplicates, >> one has unused elements that can be reduced to a duplicate, >> and some of the the structures have additional elements. >> >> These are the element-wise duplicates in usb.h >> >> usb_device_descriptor >> usb_string_descriptor >> >> For these, the usb.h definition will be removed. >> >> This definition in usb.h has extra unused elements > > Can these be merged to one global structure? >
No. The size of the structure is kept in 'bLength' field. Have bLength = sizeof(struct bla_descriptor) is the right way to go. >> usb_endpoint_descriptor >> >> unsigned char bRefresh >> unsigned char bSynchAddress; >> >> The definition of usb_endpoint_descriptor in usb.h will >> be removed. >> >> These definitions in usb.h have extra elements at the end of >> the usb 2.0 specified descriptor: >> >> usb_config_descriptor >> usb_interface_descriptor >> >> These structures will have their name shorted by removing the >> '_descriptor' suffix. >> >> So >> >> usb_config_descriptor -> usb_config >> usb_interface_descriptor -> usb_interface >> >> The common descriptor elements are now defined by the macros >> >> USB_CONFIG_DESCRIPTOR_DEFINITION >> USB_INTERFACE_DESCRIPTOR_DEFINITION > > Personally I do not like the macros for these kind of definitions, I > would prefer a solution by nesting the structures. > What do you think? I have an early version of this patch that does use nested structures. After looking at the added '.desc.' that caused a good number of changes in the c files, I went with the macro approach. It seemed like the lesser of the evils as the changes seemed smaller and were limited to the h files. What I really wanted to do was to use nameless structures but had a problem getting them to work with gcc. I do not mind reverting to the '.desc.' solution. I will resend the patches when I have had a chance to test them. Thanks Tom > > Kind regards, > > Remy > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot mailing list > U-Boot@lists.denx.de > http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot > > _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
