Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <496895AB.4050902@nokia.com> <1232061946.15331.1.camel@californication> <1232099244.27758.4.camel@californication> <1232536752.26470.1.camel@californication> Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 01:27:37 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC] Some kernel changes From: jaikumar Ganesh To: Marcel Holtmann Cc: Nick Pelly , linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 List-ID: Hi Marcel, On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 9:46 AM, jaikumar Ganesh wrote: > Hi Marcel, > > On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 3:19 AM, Marcel Holtmann wrote: >> 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 ? > >> Regards >> >> Marcel >> >> >> > Hope you got a chance to look at the above patch and comment regarding rx packets. -Thanks Jaikumar