[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <8EB5497C-1D36-42B5-946C-3CC60D6F98CB@holtmann.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 11:03:13 +0100
From: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>
To: Archie Pusaka <apusaka@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-bluetooth <linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org>,
CrosBT Upstreaming <chromeos-bluetooth-upstreaming@...omium.org>,
Archie Pusaka <apusaka@...omium.org>,
Miao-chen Chou <mcchou@...omium.org>,
Yun-Hao Chung <howardchung@...gle.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@...il.com>,
Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:NETWORKING [GENERAL]" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] Bluetooth: advmon offload MSFT handle controller
reset
Hi Archie,
>>> When the controller is powered off, the registered advertising monitor
>>> is removed from the controller. This patch handles the re-registration
>>> of those monitors when the power is on.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Archie Pusaka <apusaka@...omium.org>
>>> Reviewed-by: Miao-chen Chou <mcchou@...omium.org>
>>> Reviewed-by: Yun-Hao Chung <howardchung@...gle.com>
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> (no changes since v1)
>>>
>>> net/bluetooth/msft.c | 79 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>>> 1 file changed, 74 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/net/bluetooth/msft.c b/net/bluetooth/msft.c
>>> index f5aa0e3b1b9b..7e33a85c3f1c 100644
>>> --- a/net/bluetooth/msft.c
>>> +++ b/net/bluetooth/msft.c
>>> @@ -82,8 +82,15 @@ struct msft_data {
>>> struct list_head handle_map;
>>> __u16 pending_add_handle;
>>> __u16 pending_remove_handle;
>>> +
>>> + struct {
>>> + u8 reregistering:1;
>>> + } flags;
>>> };
>>
>> hmmm. Do you have bigger plans with this struct? I would just skip it.
>>
> This struct is also used in patch 5/5 to store the "enabled" status of
> the filter.
> Suspend/resume would need to enable/disable the filter, but it is not
> yet implemented in this patch series.
just do it without the nested structs. I think you are overdoing it here.
Regards
Marcel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists