Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: refactor state machine
To: Felipe Ferreri Tonello <eu@felipetonello.com>, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org
References: <1456947640-20673-1-git-send-email-eu@felipetonello.com>
	<1456947640-20673-2-git-send-email-eu@felipetonello.com>
	<56D7567A.40402@ladisch.de> <56D7FC6B.7040709@felipetonello.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Felipe Balbi <balbi@kernel.org>,
        Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@mina86.com>
From: Clemens Ladisch <clemens@ladisch.de>
Message-ID: <56D82237.2080705@ladisch.de>
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 12:38:31 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
	Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <56D7FC6B.7040709@felipetonello.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 816
Lines: 23

Felipe Ferreri Tonello wrote:
> On 02/03/16 21:09, Clemens Ladisch wrote:
>> Felipe F. Tonello wrote:
>>> This refactor results in a cleaner state machine code
>>
>> It increases the number of states, and now juggles two state variables.
>> I cannot agree to it being cleaner.
>
> Yes, it increases the number of states. That was done in order to
> actually implement a proper finite state machine with one state at a
> time and a transition state.

I know, "clean" is subjective.  But in what way was the old state
machine not "proper"?

And how is handling two states (port->state and next_state) cleaner?
As far as I can tell, the requirement for a separate variable comes not
from any inherent complexity of the state machine itself, but only
because the transmit_packet function was inlined.


Regards,
Clemens