Hi Inga, On Sun, Jul 25, 2010, ingas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > It seems my comment for this patch submisiion was not specific enough (my > apologies). The extended support for EIR update was meant for the cases > when d-bus methods "AddRecord", "RemoveRecord" and "Update Record" were > called. I did verify the problems that you indicated in EIR update when > using sdptool. However, this is a pre-existing condition not related to > the extensions that I submitted. sdptool uses different mechanism for EIR > update that was not affected by my changes. That needs to be fixed in a > separate patch set, IMO. Both the D-Bus interface as well as sdptool trigger the same code paths in src/sdpd-service.c. I.e. it doesn't make sense to solve this twice when it can be solved once by targetting the common lower layer. We already do this for the service class bits with update_svclass_list() in sdpd-service.c. The need to update the EIR data is very similar to the need to update the service class bits so the existing code is probably a good place to take example of. And yes, please make your commit messages more verbose. It's far less of a crime to have too verbose messages than not having them descriptive enough: it doesn't just help the reviewers right now in understanding the purpose of the patches but will also help anybody looking through the commit history a few years from now when the details of the matter have been forgotten. Johan -- 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
