On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 10:52 +0300, Luiz Augusto von Dentz wrote:
> Hi Bastien,
>
> On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Bastien Nocera <hadess@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > So that bluez compiles with -Werror.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
>
> diff --git a/attrib/gatt.c b/attrib/gatt.c
> index 360218b..61c9ed1 100644
> --- a/attrib/gatt.c
> +++ b/attrib/gatt.c
> @@ -71,13 +71,12 @@ static guint16 encode_discover_primary(uint16_t
> start, uint16_t end,
> {
> bt_uuid_t prim;
> guint16 plen;
> - uint8_t op;
>
> bt_uuid16_create(&prim, GATT_PRIM_SVC_UUID);
>
> if (uuid == NULL) {
> - /* Discover all primary services */
> - op = ATT_OP_READ_BY_GROUP_REQ;
> + /* Discover all primary services
> + op = ATT_OP_READ_BY_GROUP_REQ; */
> plen = enc_read_by_grp_req(start, end, &prim, pdu, len);
> } else {
> uint16_t u16;
>
> I guess we don't need the comments as enc_read_by_grp_req already
> should already do what ATT_OP_READ_BY_GROUP_REQ was meant.
I'll remove those.
> @@ -2085,9 +2084,9 @@ unsigned int a2dp_config(struct avdtp *session,
> struct a2dp_sep *sep,
> case AVDTP_STATE_IDLE:
> if (sep->type == AVDTP_SEP_TYPE_SOURCE) {
> l = server->sources;
> - remote_type = AVDTP_SEP_TYPE_SINK;
> + /* remote_type = AVDTP_SEP_TYPE_SINK; */
> } else {
> - remote_type = AVDTP_SEP_TYPE_SOURCE;
> + /* remote_type = AVDTP_SEP_TYPE_SOURCE; */
> l = server->sinks;
> }
>
> Same here, avdtp_find_remote_sep already take care of finding a match
> so remote_type is useless.
Ditto.
> @@ -580,7 +579,7 @@ static void hf_io_cb(GIOChannel *chan, gpointer data)
>
> server_uuid = HFP_AG_UUID;
> remote_uuid = HFP_HS_UUID;
> - svclass = HANDSFREE_AGW_SVCLASS_ID;
> + /* svclass = HANDSFREE_AGW_SVCLASS_ID; */
>
> device = manager_get_device(&src, &dst, TRUE);
> if (!device)
>
> Since introduced this variable was never really used, I guess it is
> safe to remove it completely too.
OK.
> @@ -1135,6 +1136,10 @@ gboolean bt_io_accept(GIOChannel *io,
> BtIOConnect connect, gpointer user_data,
> if (!(pfd.revents & POLLOUT)) {
> int ret;
> ret = read(sock, &c, 1);
> + if (ret == -1) {
> + ERROR_FAILED(err, "read", errno);
> + return FALSE;
> + }
> }
>
> We normally use < 0, but I guess it doesn't make any difference since
> errno is actually what we should be looking for.
I'll make the change.
> @@ -94,8 +94,12 @@ static int hcrp_credit_grant(int sk, uint16_t tid,
> uint32_t credit)
> memcpy(buf, &hdr, HCRP_PDU_HDR_SIZE);
> memcpy(buf + HCRP_PDU_HDR_SIZE, &cp, HCRP_CREDIT_GRANT_CP_SIZE);
> len = write(sk, buf, HCRP_PDU_HDR_SIZE + HCRP_CREDIT_GRANT_CP_SIZE);
> + if (len == -1)
> + return -1;
>
> len = read(sk, buf, sizeof(buf));
> + if (len == -1)
> + return -1;
> memcpy(&hdr, buf, HCRP_PDU_HDR_SIZE);
> memcpy(&rp, buf + HCRP_PDU_HDR_SIZE, HCRP_CREDIT_GRANT_RP_SIZE);
>
> @@ -119,8 +123,12 @@ static int hcrp_credit_request(int sk, uint16_t
> tid, uint32_t *credit)
> hdr.plen = htons(0);
> memcpy(buf, &hdr, HCRP_PDU_HDR_SIZE);
> len = write(sk, buf, HCRP_PDU_HDR_SIZE);
> + if (len == -1)
> + return -1;
>
> len = read(sk, buf, sizeof(buf));
> + if (len == -1)
> + return -1;
> memcpy(&hdr, buf, HCRP_PDU_HDR_SIZE);
> memcpy(&rp, buf + HCRP_PDU_HDR_SIZE, HCRP_CREDIT_REQUEST_RP_SIZE);
>
> @@ -147,8 +155,12 @@ static int hcrp_get_lpt_status(int sk, uint16_t
> tid, uint8_t *lpt_status)
> hdr.plen = htons(0);
> memcpy(buf, &hdr, HCRP_PDU_HDR_SIZE);
> len = write(sk, buf, HCRP_PDU_HDR_SIZE);
> + if (len == -1)
> + return -1;
>
> len = read(sk, buf, sizeof(buf));
> + if (len == -1)
> + return -1;
> memcpy(&hdr, buf, HCRP_PDU_HDR_SIZE);
> memcpy(&rp, buf + HCRP_PDU_HDR_SIZE, HCRP_GET_LPT_STATUS_RP_SIZE);
>
> Same here.
Yep.
> @@ -250,7 +250,7 @@ static int decode_key(const char *str)
> static void send_event(int fd, uint16_t type, uint16_t code, int32_t value)
> {
> struct uinput_event event;
> - int err;
> + int __attribute__((__unused__)) err;
>
> memset(&event, 0, sizeof(event));
> event.type = type;
>
> Can't we just removed err here, Im afraid using
> __attribute__((__unused__)) is not a good practice and we should try
> to avoid using it.
We either get a warning that the return value is unused, or that we
should be checking the return value. Which one do you prefer?
--
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
