Hi Arman,
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:36 PM, Arman Uguray <armansito@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Luiz,
>
>
>>> + case ATT_OP_TYPE_REQ:
>>> + /* If a request is currently pending, then the sequential
>>> + * protocol was violated. Disconnect the bearer and notify the
>>> + * upper-layer.
>>> + */
>>
>> It seems this code is not following our coding style regarding multi
>> line comments, check doc/coding-style.txt(M2: Multiple line comment)
>> the first line should be empty.
>>
>
> I didn't realize that was the comment style. I've seen both styles in
> daemon code and I think I went with this one because of that. I'd
> rather have the code be consistent (since shared/att uses this style
> elsewhere) and maybe do a style correction pass in another patch?
Sure, I can probably fix this myself just made the comment to let you
know that we do in fact have a coding style for it.
>
>>> + if (att->in_req) {
>>> + util_debug(att->debug_callback, att->debug_data,
>>> + "Received request while another is "
>>> + "pending: 0x%02x", opcode);
>>> + disconnect_cb(att->io, att);
>>> + return false;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + att->in_req = true;
>>> +
>>> + /* Fall through to the next case */
>>
>> This might cause a problem with our own code when connecting to each
>> other if bt_att_cancel is used, apparently bt_att_cancel does not send
>> anything to the remote side which seems to enable sending a new
>> request without waiting any response for the first one.
>>
>
> I'm confused. Do you mean if bt_att is being used in the client role,
> it can send multiple requests this way? That is correct, though I
> don't see how that's related to this patch? Currently bt_att_cancel
> can be used to cancel waiting for a pending request and send the next
> one, as you said. In that regard, it doesn't actually "cancel"
> anything if the PDU has been sent over the air already. I don't know
> how big of a problem this is, since the remote end should normally
> detect the error and terminate the connection anyway. If this becomes
> a problem we can always prevent canceling a request that has already
> left the queue and is pending. Though, again, this isn't really
> related to this patch unless I'm missing something.
Sorry for the confusion, this patch is actually fine what we really
need to fix is bt_att_cancel should not really remove the pending
request otherwise the remote may disconnect if we proceed with another
request.
--
Luiz Augusto von Dentz
--
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
