Re: [Bluez-devel] Re: [Patch] Some btsco modifications

[Fredrik Tolf <fredrik@dolda2000.com>]

On Tue, 2005-03-15 at 00:22 -0700, Brad Midgley wrote:
> Fredrik
> 
> > Another thing, that I'm not sure is a good idea, is to implement a
> > "fail-safe" mode in the daemon. Running the daemon in fail-safe mode
> > would mean that it doesn't die from not being able to connect to the
> > headset. Instead, it would try to reconnect periodically. Same thing if
> > the connection is lost at some point. The reason I'm not sure if this is
> > a good idea is that one would have to wait for the reconnection attempt
> > to get the headset working after making it accessible. Therefore, it may
> > well be a good idea to just have to run the daemon manually when one
> > knows that the headset is accessible. However, in this case, the daemon
> > should at least terminate if it looses the RFCOMM connection to the
> > headset. I don't know if it's possible to detect if the RFCOMM
> > connection is lost, though. Comments are appreciated.
> 
> I don't know about detecting broken rfcomm. I haven't experimented with it.

I just saw that sometimes the kernel apparently notices a broken RFCOMM
channel and closes the socket. I don't know yet what might trigger it
apart from an explicit disconnect.

Either way, it made the btsco daemon chew up 100% CPU, so I added a case
to detect it and exit for now. If it should be handled otherwise, that
can be fixed when it is figured out what it should do instead.

Fredrik Tolf




-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
_______________________________________________
Bluez-devel mailing list
Bluez-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-devel