Re: [Bluez-devel] Qualification Testing

[Marcel Holtmann <marcel@rvs.uni-bielefeld.de>]

Hi Max,

> > > Ok. I've fixed that (and pushed changes to BK). My idea about 
> > > with TX_THROTTLED flag didn't work. Well, it worked but only in 
> > > one direction :). Changing state machine would've been fairly big
> > > change and could've affected compatibility.
> > > So I added a simple logic to track MSC exchange state. Works beautifully
> > 
> > I like to see this logic in the state machine, but I agree with with you
> > that it is not the right time for changing it. Your patch works also
> > fine for me and I have a new 2.4.20 with all patches up and running.
> > 
> Actually MSC exchange is not part of the connect procedure. After UA is
> received DLC is considered connected. Which means some implementations
> might not send first MSC before they have data to send, that's what
> meant that changing state machine could affect compatibility.
> Besides MSC exchange, just like L2CAP config, doesn't have strict  
> sequence which makes it hard to track with a single state. i.e they 
> sent MSC first, we sent MSC first, etc. So I think we're ok.

good point. And with your argument, I feel that you have choosen the
absolute correct way to implement this.

Regards

Marcel




-------------------------------------------------------
Enterprise Linux Forum Conference & Expo, June 4-6, 2003, Santa Clara
The only event dedicated to issues related to Linux enterprise solutions
www.enterpriselinuxforum.com

_______________________________________________
Bluez-devel mailing list
Bluez-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-devel