Hi Gustavo,
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 06:13:59PM -0300, Gustavo Padovan wrote:
> Hi Andrei,
>
> * Emeltchenko Andrei <Andrei.Emeltchenko.news@xxxxxxxxx> [2011-08-18 10:44:59 +0300]:
>
> > From: Andrei Emeltchenko <andrei.emeltchenko@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Add parsing extended flowspec option in L2cap config request
> > Based upon haijun.liu <haijun.liu@xxxxxxxxxxx> series of patches
> > (sent Sun, 22 Aug 2010)
> > ---
> > net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > 1 files changed, 68 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c b/net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c
> > index 4167cb0..5378bc6 100644
> > --- a/net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c
> > +++ b/net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c
> > @@ -1890,6 +1890,12 @@ static inline __u8 l2cap_select_mode(__u8 mode, __u16 remote_feat_mask)
> > }
> > }
> >
> > +static inline bool __l2cap_efs_supported(struct l2cap_chan *chan)
> > +{
> > + return !disable_flowspec &&
> > + chan->conn->feat_mask & L2CAP_FEAT_EXT_FLOW;
> > +}
> > +
> > static int l2cap_build_conf_req(struct l2cap_chan *chan, void *data)
> > {
> > struct l2cap_conf_req *req = data;
> > @@ -1996,6 +2002,8 @@ static int l2cap_parse_conf_req(struct l2cap_chan *chan, void *data)
> > int type, hint, olen;
> > unsigned long val;
> > struct l2cap_conf_rfc rfc = { .mode = L2CAP_MODE_BASIC };
> > + struct l2cap_conf_efs efs = { .service_type = L2CAP_SERVTYPE_BESTEFFORT };
> > + u8 ext_flowspec_enable = 0;
>
> u8 remote_efs is better and shorter name.
OK
>
> > u16 mtu = L2CAP_DEFAULT_MTU;
> > u16 result = L2CAP_CONF_SUCCESS;
> >
> > @@ -2030,6 +2038,12 @@ static int l2cap_parse_conf_req(struct l2cap_chan *chan, void *data)
> >
> > break;
> >
> > + case L2CAP_CONF_EFS:
> > + ext_flowspec_enable = 1;
> > + if (olen == sizeof(efs))
> > + memcpy(&efs, (void *) val, olen);
> > + break;
> > +
> > default:
> > if (hint)
> > break;
> > @@ -2052,7 +2066,17 @@ static int l2cap_parse_conf_req(struct l2cap_chan *chan, void *data)
> > break;
> > }
> >
> > - if (chan->mode != rfc.mode)
> > + if (ext_flowspec_enable && __l2cap_efs_supported(chan)) {
> > + chan->ext_flowspec_enable = 1;
> > +
> > + chan->local_stype = L2CAP_SERVTYPE_BESTEFFORT;
> > + chan->local_msdu = L2CAP_DEFAULT_MAX_SDU_SIZE;
> > + chan->local_sdu_itime = L2CAP_DEFAULT_SDU_ARRIVAL_TIME;
> > + chan->local_acc_lat = L2CAP_DEFAULT_ACCESS_LATENCY;
> > + chan->local_flush_to = L2CAP_DEFAULT_FLUSH_TO;
> > + }
> > +
>
> parse_conf_req isn't the best place to initialize channel data. Do in at
> channel initializions procedure.
OK, I will move initialization to chan_add but in this case those
parameters will always initialize without checking that other side
supports EFS.
>
> > + if (!l2cap_mode_supported(chan->mode, chan->conn->feat_mask))
> > return -ECONNREFUSED;
> >
> > break;
> > @@ -2070,8 +2094,34 @@ done:
> > sizeof(rfc), (unsigned long) &rfc);
> > }
> >
> > + /*
> > + Add the ext flow spec and ext win size option parameters check here.
> > + */
> > + if (result == L2CAP_CONF_SUCCESS && ext_flowspec_enable) {
> > + if (!chan->ext_flowspec_enable) {
> > + /* remote efs support , local efs not supported */
> > +
> > + result = L2CAP_CONF_REJECT;
> > + return -ECONNREFUSED;
> > + } else if (chan->local_stype != L2CAP_SERVTYPE_NOTRAFIC &&
> > + efs.service_type != L2CAP_SERVTYPE_NOTRAFIC &&
> > + efs.service_type != chan->local_stype) {
>
> No need for else, just "if". And what do you want to check for here.
it checks that service type is the same for sent and receiving Conf Req.
>
> >
> > - if (result == L2CAP_CONF_SUCCESS) {
> > + result = L2CAP_CONF_UNACCEPT;
> > +
> > + if (chan->num_conf_req >= 1)
> > + return -ECONNREFUSED;
> > +
> > + l2cap_add_conf_opt(&ptr, L2CAP_CONF_EFS,
> > + sizeof(efs), (unsigned long) &efs);
> > +
> > + } else {
> > + result = L2CAP_CONF_PENDING;
> > + set_bit(CONF_LOCAL_PEND, &chan->conf_state);
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (result == L2CAP_CONF_SUCCESS || result == L2CAP_CONF_PENDING) {
> > /* Configure output options and let the other side know
> > * which ones we don't like. */
>
> If the result is pending do we need to send configurations like RFC again?
> what does the spec says about it?
As I understood if we do not make allowed modification (in rare cases) we
do not need to send EFS again.
Best regards
Andrei Emeltchenko
--
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
