Return-Path: Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 12:54:48 -0700 To: Marcel Holtmann Cc: BlueZ Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6] link trigger for AODV and + Message-ID: <20040809195448.GA24140@bougret.hpl.hp.com> Reply-To: jt@hpl.hp.com References: <20040805013335.GA13608@bougret.hpl.hp.com> <1091976547.2773.29.camel@pegasus> <20040809185159.GA21899@bougret.hpl.hp.com> <1092078516.4564.40.camel@pegasus> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1092078516.4564.40.camel@pegasus> From: Jean Tourrilhes List-ID: On Mon, Aug 09, 2004 at 09:08:36PM +0200, Marcel Holtmann wrote: > Hi Jean, > > > > no problem, I got the point. However I am not sure about applying your > > > patch. I don't like the way the event is propagated. It is a connection > > > related event and so I like to send it to the sockets that are using > > > that ACL connection. Or at least I should introduce the per device stack > > > internal events. > > > > The typical application is to monitor a BNEP connection (AODV > > deals with TCP/IP traffic). The L2CAP socket for the BNEP traffic is > > owned by the PAN deamon. However, you may want to feed the event > > directly to AODV without having to modify the PAN daemon and having to > > relay events. > > this is a good point and I do think that this patch is a nice additional > feature for BlueZ, but I am not fully comfortable with it in its current > shape. Actually some time ago I thought about removing the support for > stack internal events. In my stuff, I use internal events to know when hci interfaces go up and down and when they appear and disappear. As far as I know, those events are not available by any other means. They are not available through RtNetlink because hci interfaces are not real netdev interfaces. I personally prefer event driver APIs rather than blocking APIs, I find it much more flexible. And it fits with the raw HCI API. > > Note that the patch for the poll/listen bug was only partially > > applied to 2.4.X, I have a patch for it, I still need to test it. > > I sent the full patch for inclusion, but it came out that one part > causes troubles and so I removed this part. I didn't found the time for > a further investigation. That's what I said : I'm going to test it properly. If you could remember the issue, that would help. > Regards > > Marcel Jean