On Monday, August 23, 2021 10:11:52 AM CEST Pavel Skripkin wrote:

On 8/23/21 2:02 AM, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:

quoted

Replace usb_control_msg() with the new usb_control_msg_recv() and
usb_control_msg_send() API of USB Core.

This patch is an RFC for different reasons:

1) I'm not sure if it is needed: while Greg Kroah-Hartman suggested to
use the new API in a message to a thread that was about a series of patches
submitted by Pavel Skripkin (who decided to not use it), I cannot explain
if and why the driver would benefit from this patch.
2) I have doubts about the semantic of the API I use here, so I'd like to
know whether or not I'm using them properly.
3) At the moment I cannot test the driver because I don't have my device
with me.
4) This patch could probably lead to a slight change in some lines of
Pavel's series (for sure in usb_read*()).

I'd like to hear from the Maintainers and other interested people if this
patch is worth to be considered and, in this case, if there are suggestions
for the purpose to improve it.

Suggested-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Fabio M. De Francesco <redacted>
---
  drivers/staging/r8188eu/hal/usb_ops_linux.c | 19 ++++++++++---------
  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/hal/usb_ops_linux.c b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/hal/usb_ops_linux.c
index 6a0a24acf292..9e290c1cc449 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/hal/usb_ops_linux.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/hal/usb_ops_linux.c

@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ static int usbctrl_vendorreq(struct intf_hdl *pintfhdl, u16 value, void *pdata,
  	struct adapter	*adapt = pintfhdl->padapter;
  	struct dvobj_priv  *dvobjpriv = adapter_to_dvobj(adapt);
  	struct usb_device *udev = dvobjpriv->pusbdev;
-	unsigned int pipe;
+	u8 pipe;
  	int status = 0;
  	u8 reqtype;

I think, we can pass REALTEK_USB_VENQT_{READ,WRITE} directly as 
requesttype argument and get rid of u8 reqtype. + we can define these 
macros:

#define
usbctrl_vendor_read(...)   usbctrl_vendorreq(...,REALTEK_USB_VENQT_READ)


#define
usbctrl_vendor_write()    usbctrl_vendorreq(...,REALTEK_USB_VENQT_WRITE)


This will make code more nice, IMO  :)

Dear Pavel,

I agree in full: nicer and cleaner :)

I'll do that, but please notice that I will also need to change the code of the three 
usb_read*() for calling usbctrl_vendor_read(). Furthermore, "else res = 0;" becomes
unnecessary. Please take these changes into account when you'll send them again
as "regular" patches.

(Sorry for this formatting, my email client disabled "paste without 
formatting" option)

Actually I don't see any oddities in the format of your message :)

quoted

  	u8 *pIo_buf;

@@ -47,19 +47,20 @@ static int usbctrl_vendorreq(struct intf_hdl *pintfhdl, u16 value, void *pdata,
  		memset(pIo_buf, 0, len);
  
  		if (requesttype == 0x01) {
-			pipe = usb_rcvctrlpipe(udev, 0);/* read_in */
  			reqtype =  REALTEK_USB_VENQT_READ;
+			status = usb_control_msg_recv(udev, pipe, REALTEK_USB_VENQT_CMD_REQ,
+						      reqtype, value, REALTEK_USB_VENQT_CMD_IDX,
+						      pIo_buf, len, RTW_USB_CONTROL_MSG_TIMEOUT,
+						      GFP_KERNEL);
  		} else {
-			pipe = usb_sndctrlpipe(udev, 0);/* write_out */
  			reqtype =  REALTEK_USB_VENQT_WRITE;
-			memcpy(pIo_buf, pdata, len);

I guess, this memcpy is needed, since we want to send data from pdata

Oh, dear! How could I have missed that? Two alternatives: either because of working 
during bedtime, or I'm definitely losing my mind... :(
 

quoted

+			status = usb_control_msg_send(udev, pipe, REALTEK_USB_VENQT_CMD_REQ,
+						      reqtype, value, REALTEK_USB_VENQT_CMD_IDX,
+						      pIo_buf, len, RTW_USB_CONTROL_MSG_TIMEOUT,
+						      GFP_KERNEL);
  		}
  
-		status = usb_control_msg(udev, pipe, REALTEK_USB_VENQT_CMD_REQ,
-					 reqtype, value, REALTEK_USB_VENQT_CMD_IDX,
-					 pIo_buf, len, RTW_USB_CONTROL_MSG_TIMEOUT);
-
-		if (status == len) {   /*  Success this control transfer. */
+		if (!status) {   /*  Success this control transfer. */
  			rtw_reset_continual_urb_error(dvobjpriv);
  			if (requesttype == 0x01)
  				memcpy(pdata, pIo_buf,  len);

With regards,
Pavel Skripkin

Thanks for you review, I really appreciate it.

Regards,

Fabio

P.S.: As I wrote, I have not my ASUS N10 Nano with me and I won't have the opportunity
to test this as well as any other patch until the end of August. I hope to not break anything.
If somebody has time to test the final patch that I'm going to submit, I'd really appreciate it.