From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: Szymon Janc To: Marcel Holtmann Cc: Szymon Janc , "linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org development" Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] android/bluetooth: Use defines for settings and devices files paths Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 18:41:44 +0100 Message-ID: <1699475.kPZvhNixD9@athlon> In-Reply-To: <2F525C49-B02B-4A87-8CAE-633BF53A8ADF@holtmann.org> References: <1390316497-18451-1-git-send-email-szymon.janc@tieto.com> <1390316497-18451-3-git-send-email-szymon.janc@tieto.com> <2F525C49-B02B-4A87-8CAE-633BF53A8ADF@holtmann.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" List-ID: Hi Marcel, On Tuesday 21 January 2014 08:54:35 Marcel Holtmann wrote: > Hi Szymon, >=20 > > --- > > android/bluetooth.c | 24 +++++++++++------------- > > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) > >=20 > > diff --git a/android/bluetooth.c b/android/bluetooth.c > > index 8f08122..3314267 100644 > > --- a/android/bluetooth.c > > +++ b/android/bluetooth.c > > @@ -54,6 +54,9 @@ > >=20 > > #define DUT_MODE_FILE "/sys/kernel/debug/bluetooth/hci%u/dut_mode" > >=20 > > +#define SETTINGS_FILE ANDROID_STORAGEDIR"/settings" > > +#define DEVICES_FILE ANDROID_STORAGEDIR"/devices=E2=80=9D >=20 > is there any good reason to keep cached devices together with the bon= ded > devices? I get the feeling a cached device should be safe to throw aw= ay. So > deleting the cache file should not cause any problems. Meaning it sho= uld be > a separate file. I'm fine with having separate files too (even have this implemented on = my=20 local branch), but wanted to avoid handling multiple files. Anyway, add= /remove=20 bond doesn't happen that often so maybe this is not a problem. So, is "device_cache" name OK? Or just "cache"? --=20 Szymon K. Janc szymon.janc@gmail.com