Hi Jiayang,
On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 4:49 AM Jiayang Mao <quic_jiaymao@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> bt_gatt_client_set_security could fail if the security level is
> already BT_ATT_SECURITY_MEDIUM. So, get and check the security
> level before setting it.
Seems a bit strange that this is not handled by the kernel, can you
elaborate on the conditions to trigger it?
> Signed-off-by: Jiayang Mao <quic_jiaymao@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> profiles/input/hog.c | 6 ++++--
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/profiles/input/hog.c b/profiles/input/hog.c
> index 017e320f0..011cc0a88 100644
> --- a/profiles/input/hog.c
> +++ b/profiles/input/hog.c
> @@ -191,8 +191,10 @@ static int hog_accept(struct btd_service *service)
> return -ECONNREFUSED;
>
> client = btd_device_get_gatt_client(device);
> - if (!bt_gatt_client_set_security(client,
> - BT_ATT_SECURITY_MEDIUM))
> + if (BT_ATT_SECURITY_MEDIUM !=
> + bt_gatt_client_get_security(client) &&
> + !bt_gatt_client_set_security(client,
> + BT_ATT_SECURITY_MEDIUM))
> return -ECONNREFUSED;
Definitely not the right way to fix this since there might be other
places that do attempt to set the security, so Id got with something
like the following:
diff --git a/src/shared/att.c b/src/shared/att.c
index 4a406f4b91a4..dabbdb4315eb 100644
--- a/src/shared/att.c
+++ b/src/shared/att.c
@@ -727,6 +727,9 @@ static bool bt_att_chan_set_security(struct
bt_att_chan *chan, int level)
{
struct bt_security sec;
+ if (level == bt_att_chan_get_security(chan))
+ return true;
+
if (chan->type == BT_ATT_LOCAL) {
chan->sec_level = level;
return true;
> }
>
> --
> 2.25.1
>
>
--
Luiz Augusto von Dentz
