Hi Gustavo, > >> ERTM entity need to handle state vars, timers and counters to send and > >> receive I-frames. We initialize all of them to the default values here. > > > > while this is a good idea. Where is the justification for pushing this > > after the merge window? > > These patches are bug fixes and implementations of missing parts of ERTM spec. > For instance, they enable ERTM to transmit in a full duplex among other things. > Also, ERTM isn't enabled on L2CAP, so we aren't introducing any regressions and > ASAP we put this code on mainline more feedback we can get from > possible testers. > > Should I put this on the commit message? if it fixes a bug in the current implementation, then that is fine. If it adds another feature, then it is not acceptable. However if that feature is mandatory by the specification, then that is a different story. Make it perfectly clear what you are fixing or adding. L2CAP has been in the kernel before and so the not introducing a regression is not a real valid argument. You normally only get that for new drivers or subsystems. And forget about the idea with the more testers. After the merge window that comment is void. Regards Marcel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bluetooth" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
