On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
Hi Mat,
Checks for valid policy value and L2CAP mode.
Signed-off-by: Mat Martineau <mathewm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
net/bluetooth/l2cap_sock.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/bluetooth/l2cap_sock.c b/net/bluetooth/l2cap_sock.c
index 836d12e..9431e38 100644
--- a/net/bluetooth/l2cap_sock.c
+++ b/net/bluetooth/l2cap_sock.c
@@ -467,6 +467,11 @@ static int l2cap_sock_getsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname, ch
break;
+ case BT_AMP_POLICY:
+ if (put_user(chan->amp_policy, (u32 __user *) optval))
+ err = -EFAULT;
I prefer to not just add such an option just yet. We only want to add
socket option once they are functional. Otherwise we have problems to
detect if such an option is working or not. So enabling this option
should be the last patch after we have AMP implemented.
Hi Marcel -
My plan was to add checks for enable_hs before adding any code that
takes action based on amp_policy. Would it be acceptable to add those
enable_hs checks now so the code is in place, but disabled by default?
It would be helpful for development and testing.
Regards,
--
Mat Martineau
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum
--
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
