Hi Marcel,
Please take a look at the modified patch based on your feedback. Thanks.
On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 4:42 PM Marcel Holtmann <marcel@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Sonny,
>
> > Could you take another look at my last proposal based on your
> > suggestion? If we are to move the logic inside hci_cc_inquiry_cancel,
> > we will need a way to update the status to the caller, for example by
> > having hci_cc_inquiry_cancel return a value, or accept a pointer for
> > the updated status value. Let me know which way you prefer.
>
> maybe something like this (missing comment of course):
>
> --- a/net/bluetooth/hci_event.c
> +++ b/net/bluetooth/hci_event.c
> @@ -42,14 +42,20 @@
>
> /* Handle HCI Event packets */
>
> -static void hci_cc_inquiry_cancel(struct hci_dev *hdev, struct sk_buff *skb)
> +static void hci_cc_inquiry_cancel(struct hci_dev *hdev, struct sk_buff *skb,
> + u8 *new_status)
> {
> __u8 status = *((__u8 *) skb->data);
>
> BT_DBG("%s status 0x%2.2x", hdev->name, status);
>
> - if (status)
> + if (status) {
> + if (!test_bit(HCI_INQUIRY, &hdev->flags) && status == 0x0c) {
> + BT_DBG("Ignoring error of HCI Inquiry Cancel command");
> + *new_status = 0x00;
> + }
> return;
> + }
>
> clear_bit(HCI_INQUIRY, &hdev->flags);
> smp_mb__after_atomic(); /* wake_up_bit advises about this barrier */
> @@ -3233,7 +3239,7 @@ static void hci_cmd_complete_evt(struct hci_dev *hdev, struct sk_buff *skb,
>
> switch (*opcode) {
> case HCI_OP_INQUIRY_CANCEL:
> - hci_cc_inquiry_cancel(hdev, skb);
> + hci_cc_inquiry_cancel(hdev, skb, status);
> break;
>
> case HCI_OP_PERIODIC_INQ:
>
> Regards
>
> Marcel
>
