Hi Johan, On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 02:33:10PM +0300, Johan Hedberg wrote: > > > > > > + if (lmpver) > > > > > > + bt_free(lmpver); > > > > > > + if (hciver) > > > > > > + bt_free(hciver); > > > > > > > > > > These trace back to using malloc (in hci_uint2str) so I suppose free is > > > > > more appropriate than bt_free (which should be used for bt_malloc). > > > > > > > > OK, I will change it to free(). Shall I also change other similar > > > > bt_free() calls which I took as example? > > > > > > I'm not sure it's worth bothering with legacy code like this which will > > > eventually disappear from the tree. > > > > Those constructions are in hcitool and hciconfig > > Still legacy code. If you really feel like there's nothing else > important to work on feel free to send patches for that. The question is if we change some programming practice shall we make other code looks consistent. Best regards Andrei Emeltchenko -- 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
