On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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. :-) Mumble grumble. Oh well! :) I'm starting to enjoy the curve balls. Luis -- 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
