On Mon, 26 Mar 2012, Andrei Emeltchenko wrote:
Hi Mat, On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 04:56:58PM -0700, Mat Martineau wrote:These functions encode or decode ERTM control fields (extended or enhanced) to or from the new l2cap_control structure. Signed-off-by: Mat Martineau <mathewm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c | 120 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 120 insertions(+) diff --git a/net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c b/net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c index ad73696..890cfb9 100644 --- a/net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c +++ b/net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c @@ -787,6 +787,118 @@ static inline void l2cap_send_rr_or_rnr(struct l2cap_chan *chan, u32 control) l2cap_send_sframe(chan, control); } +static u16 __pack_enhanced_control(struct l2cap_ctrl *control) +{ + u16 packed; + + packed = (control->reqseq << L2CAP_CTRL_REQSEQ_SHIFT) & + L2CAP_CTRL_REQSEQ; + packed |= (control->final << L2CAP_CTRL_FINAL_SHIFT) & + L2CAP_CTRL_FINAL;Is "& L2CAP_CTRL_FINAL" needed here and for other similar values?
Since many of the values in l2cap_ctrl are now bitfields, the extra masking in the __pack functions does seem like overkill.
Thanks, -- 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
