From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: <50445E09.9000909@tieto.com> Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2012 09:36:41 +0200 From: Andrzej Kaczmarek MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Anderson Lizardo CC: "linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] RFC: proximity cleanup References: <1346417314-25109-1-git-send-email-andrzej.kaczmarek@tieto.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Anderson, On 08/31/2012 06:17 PM, Anderson Lizardo wrote: > Hi Andrzej, > > On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 8:48 AM, Andrzej Kaczmarek > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Here are few patches to cleanup proximity profile code a bit which seem to >> keep track of some data which are redundant and has minor issue with device >> driver registration. >> >> Most cleanup is done in patch #3 which removes tracking of DBusConnection >> across whole plugin and simply uses get_dbus_connection() wherever necessary. >> This is different than other profile plugins do, but reduces code size and >> memory footprint a bit so can be done for other plugins as well if accepted. > > While some cleanups here are very welcome, I'm worried that you are > cleaning up things before finishing the Proximity Reporter > implementation. Power Level characteristic for instance is currently a > stub, how do you plan to store it per adapter, without the struct > reporter_adapter? Ah, I didn't find it on TODO so assumed it's complete. But you're right, it probably should not be removed. > Therefore I suggest you split the "trivial" cleanups from the removal > of struct reporter_adapter. Please just consider patches #6 and #7 as invalid for now, I think there's no point in sending #1-5 once more until there are some comments to fix. > BTW, do you have plans to add more features to the Proximity Reporter > implementation? No plans at the moment, but perhaps I'll take a look on this in more details after HRP is finished (v2 will be sent soon). BR, Andrzej