Hi Lizardo,
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 7:48 AM, Anderson Lizardo
<anderson.lizardo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Andre,
>
> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:29 AM, Andre Guedes <aguedespe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> diff --git a/net/bluetooth/hci_event.c b/net/bluetooth/hci_event.c
>> index 6808069..3933ccd 100644
>> --- a/net/bluetooth/hci_event.c
>> +++ b/net/bluetooth/hci_event.c
>> @@ -3255,12 +3255,10 @@ static inline void hci_le_adv_report_evt(struct hci_dev *hdev,
>> void *ptr = &skb->data[1];
>> s8 rssi;
>>
>> - hci_dev_lock(hdev);
>> -
>
> So there is no need to lock hdev between the hci_add_adv_entry() and
> mgmt_device_found() calls? This looks different from what is done for
> BR/EDR for the inquiry cache.
Yes, mgmt_device_found() does not require locking hdev->lock.
>> while (num_reports--) {
>> struct hci_ev_le_advertising_info *ev = ptr;
>>
>> - __hci_add_adv_entry(hdev, ev);
>> + hci_add_adv_entry(hdev, ev);
>>
>> rssi = ev->data[ev->length];
>> mgmt_device_found(hdev, &ev->bdaddr, LE_LINK, ev->bdaddr_type,
>> @@ -3268,8 +3266,6 @@ static inline void hci_le_adv_report_evt(struct hci_dev *hdev,
>>
>> ptr += sizeof(*ev) + ev->length + 1;
>> }
>> -
>> - hci_dev_unlock(hdev);
>> }
>>
>> static inline void hci_le_ltk_request_evt(struct hci_dev *hdev,
>> --
>> 1.7.9
BR,
Andre
--
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
