Hi Lizardo,
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011, Anderson Lizardo wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 7:04 PM, <johan.hedberg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > @@ -2447,14 +2447,47 @@ static inline void hci_user_confirm_request_evt(struct hci_dev *hdev,
> > struct sk_buff *skb)
> > {
> > struct hci_ev_user_confirm_req *ev = (void *) skb->data;
> > + int loc_mitm, rem_mitm;
> > + struct hci_conn *conn;
> >
> > BT_DBG("%s", hdev->name);
> >
> > hci_dev_lock(hdev);
> >
> > - if (test_bit(HCI_MGMT, &hdev->flags))
> > - mgmt_user_confirm_request(hdev->id, &ev->bdaddr, ev->passkey);
> > + if (!test_bit(HCI_MGMT, &hdev->flags))
> > + goto unlock;
>
> You lock hdev for checking hdev->flags, but not for reading hdev->name
> on the BT_DBG() call. Is that ok?
I suppose hdev->name can be considered a read-only value as it never
changes after the HCI dev is created. There's also lots of other places
in hci_event.c that access it without locking, so I think this should be
fine.
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
