Re: [PATCH 10/13] drivers/usb/gadget: use USB API functions rather than constants

[Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk>]

> ...
> 
> > diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/file_storage.c b/drivers/usb/gadget/file_storage.c
> > index 88fedd0..c44092b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/usb/gadget/file_storage.c
> > +++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/file_storage.c
> > @@ -248,6 +248,7 @@
> >  #include <linux/freezer.h>
> >  #include <linux/utsname.h>
> >  
> > +#include <linux/usb.h>
> >  #include <linux/usb/ch9.h>
> >  #include <linux/usb/gadget.h>
> 
> While there's nothing wrong with this part of the patch, it hardly 
> seems necessary.  Was there any reason for including it?

The new functions are defined in usb.h. I have added the include in 
this file and in the file epautoconf.c that this file includes.  If it is 
removed from both, then the code does not compile (after make 
allyesconfig):

In file included from drivers/usb/gadget/file_storage.c:268:
drivers/usb/gadget/epautoconf.c: In function 'ep_matches':
drivers/usb/gadget/epautoconf.c:79: error: implicit declaration of 
function 'usb_endpoint_type'
drivers/usb/gadget/epautoconf.c:122: error: implicit declaration of 
function 'usb_endpoint_dir_in'
make[1]: *** [drivers/usb/gadget/file_storage.o] Error 1
make: *** [drivers/usb/gadget/file_storage.o] Error 2

While putting it in epautoconf.c would be sufficient, the includes

#include <linux/usb/ch9.h>
#include <linux/usb/gadget.h>

are already repeated in both, so it would seem reasonable to repeat usb.h 
in both as well.

julia