On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 10:18 -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 17:30 +0300, Andrei Emeltchenko wrote: > > On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 04:25:08PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 15:30 +0200, David Herrmann wrote: > > > > Hi Johannes > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 1:49 PM, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Really? 2 static buffers that are used alternately based on a static > > > > > variable? How can that possibly be thread-safe? That may work in very > > > > > restricted scenarios, but ... > > > > > > > > Looking at "git blame" it seems the whole function is still from > > > > linux-2.4. Looks like no-one ever noticed. I've sent a patchset fixing > > > > it, thanks. > > > > > > I was thinking you could use %pM, but it seems BT addresses are stored > > > the wrong way around for some reason ... > > > > This looks like better idea then allocating buffers, we can use swap to > > take care about "wrong order". > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/12/3/358 Pretty much what I had in mind, thanks. Luis, you'll notice that this will be a pain to backport in compat. :-) johannes -- 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
