Hi Marcel,
On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 02:11:56PM +0100, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> Hi Andrei,
>
> > net/bluetooth/hci_conn.c | 6 ++++++
> > 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/bluetooth/hci_conn.c b/net/bluetooth/hci_conn.c
> > index b328ac6..beb280e 100644
> > --- a/net/bluetooth/hci_conn.c
> > +++ b/net/bluetooth/hci_conn.c
> > @@ -749,6 +749,9 @@ void hci_conn_enter_active_mode(struct hci_conn *conn, __u8 force_active)
> > if (test_bit(HCI_RAW, &hdev->flags))
> > return;
> >
> > + if (hdev->dev_type != HCI_BREDR)
> > + return;
> > +
> > if (conn->mode != HCI_CM_SNIFF)
> > goto timer;
> >
> > @@ -783,6 +786,9 @@ void hci_conn_enter_sniff_mode(struct hci_conn *conn)
> > if (conn->mode != HCI_CM_ACTIVE || !(conn->link_policy & HCI_LP_SNIFF))
> > return;
> >
> > + if (hdev->dev_type != HCI_BREDR)
> > + return;
> > +
> > if (lmp_sniffsubr_capable(hdev) && lmp_sniffsubr_capable(conn)) {
> > struct hci_cp_sniff_subrate cp;
> > cp.handle = cpu_to_le16(conn->handle);
>
> I am really not sure that this is the best solution. It sounds like way
> to much overhead. Essentially I read this is being ignorant to what kind
> of controller we have and only last last minute we bother checking.
Do you think that the check shall be the first in
enter_[sniff|active]_mode commands or it shall be somewhere before those functions?
BTW: Can compiler do something for us if we use "unlikely" before those
checks?
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
