Hi Johan,
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 8:09 AM, Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Andre,
>
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013, Andre Guedes wrote:
> > @@ -1079,6 +1077,8 @@ static void hci_cs_inquiry(struct hci_dev *hdev, __u8 status)
> > {
> > BT_DBG("%s status 0x%2.2x", hdev->name, status);
> >
> > + hci_req_cmd_complete(hdev, HCI_OP_INQUIRY, status);
> > +
> > if (status) {
> > hci_conn_check_pending(hdev);
> > hci_dev_lock(hdev);
>
> What about the hci_req_cmd_status call in the hci_cmd_status_evt
> function? hci_req_cmd_status could call hci_req_cmd_complete in which
> case you'd get two calls to that function for the same event.
You are right. In case "status" is not zero, the callback function
will be called twice. This hci_req_cmd_complete call should go at the
end of hci_cs_inquiry, after the status check.
> I have a feeling that if you really want to consider all commands as
> completed based on command status events we should just skip the whole
> hci_req_cmd_status/complete distinction and remove the
> hci_req_cmd_status function completely (always calling cmd_complete).
I don't see any problem with this approach you suggested. If nobody
else is against this, I can do this change in the next version of this
patch set.
Regards,
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
