Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1328795351.28848.17.camel@aeonflux> References: <1328588997-25029-1-git-send-email-aguedespe@gmail.com> <1328795351.28848.17.camel@aeonflux> Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 15:23:29 -0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Advertising cache locking code refactoring From: Ulisses Furquim To: Marcel Holtmann Cc: Andre Guedes , linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org, andre.guedes@openbossa.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 List-ID: Hi Marcel, On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Marcel Holtmann wrot= e: > Hi Andre, > >> This patch series does some code refactoring in advertising cache lockin= g >> related code. This work is a small effort to improve locking usage in >> Bluetooth subsystem. >> >> BR, >> >> Andre >> >> Andre Guedes (3): >> =A0 Bluetooth: Add prefix "__" to advertising cache functions >> =A0 Bluetooth: Create thread-safe advertising cache functions >> =A0 Bluetooth: Use advertising cache thread-safe functions >> >> =A0include/net/bluetooth/hci_core.h | =A0 =A04 +++ >> =A0net/bluetooth/hci_conn.c =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 | =A0 =A02 +- >> =A0net/bluetooth/hci_core.c =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 | =A0 51 +++++++++++++++++++= ++++++++++++------ >> =A0net/bluetooth/hci_event.c =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0| =A0 =A06 +--- >> =A04 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > > so I looked through this patch series and the only useful patch is 1/3 > and even that one is kinda questionable. However if people in general > find this a bit clearer that we prefix unlocked hdev functions with __, > then I would be fine is it. Opinions anybody? Not sure if you saw my replies. I said this series is not needed at all IMO. And if we want to prefix unlocked hdev functions with __ then we better change all of them to have everything consistent. And I'm really against adding locked versions if we're not really using them. Best regards, --=20 Ulisses Furquim ProFUSION embedded systems http://profusion.mobi Mobile: +55 19 9250 0942 Skype: ulissesffs