Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1337940693-3417-1-git-send-email-mikel.astiz.oss@gmail.com> <1337940693-3417-4-git-send-email-mikel.astiz.oss@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 12:45:18 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH obexd v1 03/16] client: Add progress property to transfer From: Mikel Astiz To: Luiz Augusto von Dentz Cc: linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org, Mikel Astiz Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Luiz, On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Luiz Augusto von Dentz wrote: > Hi Mikel, > > On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Mikel Astiz wrote: > >> +static void transfer_notify_progress(struct obc_transfer *transfer) >> +{ >> + ? ? ? gint64 now; >> + ? ? ? gint64 notify; >> + >> + ? ? ? DBG("Transfer %p progress: %lu bytes", transfer, transfer->transferred); >> + >> + ? ? ? if (transfer->path == NULL) >> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? return; >> + >> + ? ? ? if (transfer->transferred == transfer->transferred_dbus) >> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? return; >> + >> + ? ? ? now = g_get_monotonic_time(); >> + ? ? ? notify = transfer->transferred_dbus_time + >> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? TRANSFER_PROGRESS_PERIOD * 1000; >> + >> + ? ? ? if ((transfer->transferred != transfer->size) && (now < notify)) >> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? return; >> + >> + ? ? ? transfer->transferred_dbus = transfer->transferred; >> + ? ? ? transfer->transferred_dbus_time = now; >> + >> + ? ? ? obex_dbus_signal_property_changed(transfer->conn, >> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? transfer->path, >> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? TRANSFER_INTERFACE, "Progress", >> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? DBUS_TYPE_INT64, >> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? &transfer->transferred_dbus); >> +} > > I would suggest doing it in a different manner using > g_timeout_add_seconds and storing the id, so you just need to know if > the timer is running by checking the id, if there is no timer running > you start it, if there is you just update the bytes transferred and > wait the timeout to be fired where you emit the signal. If in the > meantime the transfer is completed you just have to cleanup using > g_source_remove, this should be simpler because you don't have to > bother how much time has passed on every packet. That would certainly avoid a call to g_get_monotonic_time() every time we receive a packet, but on the other hand we would be waking up the process one additional time per second. I'm not sure if there is any performance improvement there. >From the implementation complexity point of view both approaches equally simple. Cheers, Mikel