logo       

RE: Rfcomm use count: msg#00028

linux.bluez.devel

Subject: RE: Rfcomm use count

Hi Daryl,

> I just noticed that bluez_accept_unlink() was called with a socked that was
> in state BT_CLOSED, so it can't be the second if(). It would have been
> called from the first if().
>
> Clearly, I'm on glue.
>
> Still, does the order of bluez_accept_unlink() and sock_release() matter?

I haven't done a full audit yet, but try to switch the order and see
what happens. From a first look at it it makes sense to only release the
socket when all the work is done, because otherwise lock_sock() makes no
sense.

Regards

Marcel




-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170
Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on
who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM.
Deadline: Sept. 13. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Google Custom Search

News | FAQ | advertise