Hi Marcel,
Sent v1 with the changes.
-Arman
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Marcel Holtmann <marcel@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Arman,
>
>>>> +struct result_ptrs {
>>>> + struct bt_gatt_result *head;
>>>> + struct bt_gatt_result *tail;
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>> +struct discovery_op {
>>>> + struct bt_att *att;
>>>> + uint16_t end_handle;
>>>> + int ref_count;
>>>> + bt_uuid_t uuid;
>>>> + struct result_ptrs result;
>>>
>>> Does this nested struct give you any benefit. Why not just include head and tail pointers directly.
>>>
>>
>> I initially thought that I would reuse the result ptrs but I didn't so
>> it's not that necessary any more.
>>
>>
>>> I was actually thinking that struct bt_gatt_result will keep the tail pointer all by itself. That way it is self-contained.
>>
>> I'd rather have the head and tail pointers inside discovery_op. It's a
>> bit weird for each "link" (i.e. struct bt_gatt_result) to have a tail
>> pointer, which the iterator itself won't ever use later.
>
> then go for putting them in discovery_op. We can optimize things later since these are all internal details.
>
> Regards
>
> Marcel
>
--
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
