Dear Archie,
Am 22.08.22 um 08:49 schrieb Archie Pusaka:
On Mon, 22 Aug 2022 at 14:40, Paul Menzel <pmenzel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Am 22.08.22 um 08:33 schrieb Archie Pusaka:
On Mon, 22 Aug 2022 at 14:15, Paul Menzel <pmenzel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Am 22.08.22 um 06:53 schrieb Archie Pusaka:
From: Archie Pusaka <apusaka@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
I think the tag in the email subject needs to be [PATCH BlueZ] to be
detected by the build bot.
Is the bot the one who just commented about the test result? If so
probably it can detect this format as well.
Yes, I noticed after hitting *Send*.
We set the pending settings flag when sending MGMT_SETTING_*
commands to the MGMT layer and clear them when receiving success
reply, but we don't clear them when receiving error reply. This
might cause a setting to be stuck in pending state.
Were you able to reproduce a problem on real hardware?
I only received some reports, but unfortunately I cannot repro on real
hardware. The symptom is BlueZ can't be turned off, snoop logs shows
that MGMT_OP_SET_POWERED fails to be sent, and we are stuck with it
since the next commands to toggle power are ignored.
Therefore, also clear the pending flag when receiving error.
Furthermore, this patch also postpone setting the pending flag
postpone*s*
Thanks, will fix.
until we queue the MGMT command in order to avoid setting it too
soon but we return early.
Maybe add a comment, that how you tested this?
The reporter claims the problem is no longer observable after this
patch. I didn't do any other intelligent way of testing,
unfortunately. Do I also need to document that?
Is the bug report public.
No, the bug report is filed by Vendor testing unreleased devices, so
unfortunately it is not public.
Understood. For others to reproduce later on, I think, it’s always good
to have some hints, on what to do. Especially with Bluetooth where two
devices are involved. Maybe share as much information as you can. (But,
it’s also my personal opinion. It’s not required.)
It’s not a requirement. I just thought, that the Chromium project has a
big QA setup, and runs on millions of devices, it’d be good to know, for
example, if the patch was battle proven for several months in production
or if it’s verified by one person.
Chromium usually holds the "upstream first" spirit, this patch is no
exception. So, currently it is not battle proven.
Whether accepted or not, we would still merge it to the Chromium tree
though. If required, by that time I can circle back to this patch and
report any future findings.
Ah, then I made the wrong assumptions from the address
chromeos-bluetooth-upstreaming@xxxxxxxxxxxx. Sorry about that, and thank
you for clearing that up. I am going to remember that.
Kind regards,
Paul
