Return-Path: <cyrus@holtmann.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1233130363.18259.33.camel@violet>
References: <35c90d960901261529i699411a7jddb81b8d9bef74f8@mail.gmail.com>
	 <B9402F9A-9F2F-4C2B-8F54-24DD213A167A@holtmann.org>
	 <35c90d960901261738t510f7db9v9067c4d70999159f@mail.gmail.com>
	 <AD39F28E-2948-4CD3-9608-4FA48F7F4516@holtmann.org>
	 <35c90d960901262023gebe94c5w9a355d6886b32922@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1233130363.18259.33.camel@violet>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 01:16:49 -0800
Message-ID: <35c90d960901280116k30f461edod533baa4fb4b5f5@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: duplicate L2CAP connection requests - before and after L2CAP
	information response
From: Nick Pelly <npelly@google.com>
To: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>
Cc: linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org, Jaikumar Ganesh <jaikumar@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
List-ID: <linux-bluetooth.vger.kernel.org>

Hi Marcel,

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 12:12 AM, Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org> wrote:
> Hi Nick,
>
> I think your kernel is wrongly patched. Don't cherry-pick patches that
> you don't know the impact of.

Thanks for testing,

I've narrowed it down. The rogue patch is in fact ours:

@@ -916,8 +916,8 @@ static inline void hci_conn_complete_evt(struct
hci_dev *hdev, struct sk_buff *s
                }
        }

+       hci_proto_connect_cfm(conn, ev->status);
        if (ev->status) {
-               hci_proto_connect_cfm(conn, ev->status);
                hci_conn_del(conn);
        }

This patch was motivated by a discussion in an earlier thread - see
conn->state vs conn->sk->sk_state.

Sorry for the false alarm, I was not initially suspicious of this
patch because it was not in l2cap.c.

Nick