Return-Path: Subject: Re: [RFC] Some kernel changes From: Marcel Holtmann To: jaikumar Ganesh Cc: Nick Pelly , Ville Tervo , linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org, johan.hedberg@nokia.com In-Reply-To: References: <496895AB.4050902@nokia.com> <1232061946.15331.1.camel@californication> <1232099244.27758.4.camel@californication> <1232536752.26470.1.camel@californication> <1233136775.2139.3.camel@violet> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 11:35:50 +0100 Message-Id: <1233138950.2139.4.camel@violet> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Jaikumar, > >> >> >>>>> why do you wanna set AUTH_PENDING again. That is not needed we only > >> >> >>>>> wanna know once encryption comes back on. If no in time, then we just > >> >> >>>>> disconnect the link. That simple. > >> >> >>>>> > >> >> >>>>>> b) I also see that we are not clearing the timer and hence after > >> >> >>>>>> RFCOMM_AUTH_TIMEOUT period expires we bring down the RFCOMM connection > >> >> >>>>>> even though the encryption has been established. > >> >> >>>>> > >> >> >>>>> Good catch. Fixed it. > >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> Cool. Can you upload it to bluetooth-testing git ? I saw a related > >> >> >>>> problem while looking at the timer issue and wanted to see if the fix > >> >> >>>> takes care of it. > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> I am in the process in doing so, but there are other important things > >> >> >>> that need to be done first. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Sorry to push you on this, is this patch been uploaded ? > >> >> > > >> >> > since a few days now. Check the bluetooth-testing.git and it is even rebased > >> >> > against 2.6.29-rc2. > >> >> > > >> >> I applied the patches and I see that we actually don't pause the > >> >> RFCOMM tx traffic because we don't check on > >> >> the RFCOMM_SEC_PENDING flag when sending the tx packets in rfcomm_process_dlcs. > >> >> I verified this using the "attest" command - we keep sending RFCOMM > >> >> traffic even though encryption is off. > >> >> > >> >> Please look at the patch attached. > >> >> > >> >> Also should we drop the "rx" packets too when the encryption is dropped ? > >> > > >> > can you get me a version with a proper commit message. Just the subject > >> > is not gonna be good enough. > >> > > >> > >> Sorry, its attached. Also like mentioned above the patch checks only > >> while sending tx packets ? > >> Should we drop "rx" packets also ? > > > > patch looks fine to me, but you need to fix/revert the comment change ;) > > > > diff --git a/net/bluetooth/rfcomm/core.c b/net/bluetooth/rfcomm/core.c > > index ae2ecaa..73ffc0c 100644 > > --- a/net/bluetooth/rfcomm/core.c > > +++ b/net/bluetooth/rfcomm/core.c > > @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ > > -/* > > +f* > > RFCOMM implementation for Linux Bluetooth stack (BlueZ). > > Copyright (C) 2002 Maxim Krasnyansky > > Copyright (C) 2002 Marcel Holtmann > > > > And I like to have a little bit more detailed commit message please. > > > Sure I will resubmit > Also, should we drop the "rx" packets ? no, we can't do that since RFCOMM support to be a reliable stream. Regards Marcel