Re: [REGRESSION] rfcomm (userland) broken by commit 29cd718b

[Gianluca Anzolin]

On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 02:34:12PM -0500, Peter Hurley wrote:
> 
> This solution is acceptable to me, but I think the comment should briefly
> explain why this fix is necessary, and the changelog should explain why in detail.
> 
> Perhaps with a fixme comment that rfcomm_tty_install() should just take over
> the port reference (instead of adding one) and rfcomm_tty_cleanup() should
> conditionally release on RFCOMM_RELEASE_ONHUP.
> 
> Because then:
> 1) this fix would not be necessary.
> 2) the release in rfcomm_tty_hangup() would not be necessary
> 3) the second release in rfcomm_release_dev would not be necessary
> 4) the RFCOMM_TTY_RELEASED bit could be removed
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Peter Hurley

Taking over the refcount in the install method would certainly look better. I'm
going to test it ASAP :D

But why getting rid of the release in in rfcomm_tty_hangup()?
We could lose the bluetooth connection at any time and the dlc callback
would have to hangup the tty (and release the port if necessary).

Also the RFCOMM_TTY_RELEASED bit should still be necessary if the port is
created without the RFCOMM_RELEASE_ONHUP flag.

Besides any process could release the port behind us (with the command rfcomm
release rfcomm1 for example).

Gianluca
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/