Return-Path: <cyrus@holtmann.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <B1DE8040-EA3D-4B9B-9649-033A8FB49F46@holtmann.org>
References: <1406664949-25196-1-git-send-email-armansito@chromium.org>
	<B1DE8040-EA3D-4B9B-9649-033A8FB49F46@holtmann.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 14:57:07 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHrH25QOoRJjziR6K1rh3s5HAvKEaX62+LWB022G5E1eZ_WppA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] shared/gatt: Use iterator based discovery result structure.
From: Arman Uguray <armansito@google.com>
To: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>
Cc: Arman Uguray <armansito@chromium.org>,
	BlueZ development <linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
List-ID: <linux-bluetooth.vger.kernel.org>

Hi Marcel,


>> +struct result_ptrs {
>> +     struct bt_gatt_result *head;
>> +     struct bt_gatt_result *tail;
>> +};
>> +
>> +struct discovery_op {
>> +     struct bt_att *att;
>> +     uint16_t end_handle;
>> +     int ref_count;
>> +     bt_uuid_t uuid;
>> +     struct result_ptrs result;
>
> Does this nested struct give you any benefit. Why not just include head and tail pointers directly.
>

I initially thought that I would reuse the result ptrs but I didn't so
it's not that necessary any more.


> I was actually thinking that struct bt_gatt_result will keep the tail pointer all by itself. That way it is self-contained.

I'd rather have the head and tail pointers inside discovery_op. It's a
bit weird for each "link" (i.e. struct bt_gatt_result) to have a tail
pointer, which the iterator itself won't ever use later.

Cheers,
Arman