Hi Arman,
On 18 July 2014 23:13, Arman Uguray <armansito@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> This patch implements the helper function bt_gatt_exchange_mtu, which performs
> an ATT "Exchange MTU" request and resizes the internal buffer based on the
> result.
> ---
> src/shared/gatt-helpers.c | 87 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 85 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/shared/gatt-helpers.c b/src/shared/gatt-helpers.c
> index 3d85868..9cf05cf 100644
> --- a/src/shared/gatt-helpers.c
> +++ b/src/shared/gatt-helpers.c
> @@ -30,14 +30,97 @@
> #include "src/shared/att.h"
> #include "lib/uuid.h"
> #include "src/shared/gatt-helpers.h"
> +#include "src/shared/util.h"
> +
> +#ifndef MIN
> +#define MIN(a, b) ((a) < (b) ? (a) : (b))
> +#endif
> +
> +struct mtu_op {
> + struct bt_att *att;
> + uint16_t client_rx_mtu;
> + bt_gatt_result_callback_t callback;
> + void *user_data;
> + bt_gatt_destroy_func_t destroy;
> +};
> +
> +static void destroy_mtu_op(void *user_data)
> +{
> + struct mtu_op *op = user_data;
> +
> + if (op->destroy)
> + op->destroy(op->user_data);
> +
> + free(op);
> +}
> +
> +static uint16_t process_error(const void *pdu, uint16_t length)
> +{
> + if (!pdu || length != 4)
> + return BT_GATT_ERROR_INVALID_RSP;
> +
> + return (uint16_t)((uint8_t *) pdu)[3];
> +}
> +
> +static void mtu_cb(uint8_t opcode, const void *pdu, uint16_t length,
> + void *user_data)
> +{
> + struct mtu_op *op = user_data;
> + uint16_t result = 0;
> + uint16_t server_rx_mtu;
> +
> + if (opcode == BT_ATT_OP_ERROR_RSP) {
> + result = process_error(pdu, length);
> + goto done;
> + }
> +
> + if (opcode != BT_ATT_OP_MTU_RSP || !pdu || length != 2) {
> + result = BT_GATT_ERROR_INVALID_RSP;
> + goto done;
> + }
> +
> + server_rx_mtu = get_le16(pdu);
> + bt_att_set_mtu(op->att, MIN(op->client_rx_mtu, server_rx_mtu));
> +
> +done:
> + if (op->callback)
> + op->callback(result, op->user_data);
> +}
>
> bool bt_gatt_exchange_mtu(struct bt_att *att, uint16_t client_rx_mtu,
> bt_gatt_result_callback_t callback,
> void *user_data,
> bt_gatt_destroy_func_t destroy)
> {
> - /* TODO */
> - return false;
> + struct mtu_op *op;
> + uint8_t pdu[2];
> +
> + if (!att)
> + return false;
> +
> + if (!client_rx_mtu)
> + return false;
> +
Would it be better to include att and client_rx_mtu check in one "if"
statement ? (both of them return false)
> + op = new0(struct mtu_op, 1);
> + if (!op)
> + return false;
> +
> + op->att = att;
> + op->client_rx_mtu = client_rx_mtu;
> + op->callback = callback;
> + op->user_data = user_data;
> + op->destroy = destroy;
> +
> + put_le16(client_rx_mtu, pdu);
> +
> + if (!bt_att_send(att, BT_ATT_OP_MTU_REQ, pdu, sizeof(pdu),
> + mtu_cb, op,
> + destroy_mtu_op)) {
> + free(op);
> + return false;
> + }
> +
> + return true;
> }
>
> bool bt_gatt_discover_primary_services(struct bt_att *att,
> --
> 2.0.0.526.g5318336
>
> --
> 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
Best regards,
Grzegorz
--
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
