Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 13:59:15 -0800 From: Maksim Yevmenkin <maksim.yevmenkin@savvis.net> To: Iain Hibbert <plunky@rya-online.net> Cc: freebsd-bluetooth@freebsd.org Subject: Re: whitespace Message-ID: <440E0233.7080703@savvis.net> In-Reply-To: <1141767948.252179.12317.nullmailer@galant.ukfsn.org> References: <1141762244.118700.5588.nullmailer@galant.ukfsn.org> <440DEE78.5020500@savvis.net> <1141767948.252179.12317.nullmailer@galant.ukfsn.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Iain Hibbert wrote:
>>of course. i will take patches from anybody (as long as it conforms to
>>style(9)) :) why do you even ask? :)
>
> Hey, maybe you are some kind of dragon? :)
>
> I just read this document though, and it seems that whitespace changes
> alone are not encouraged.. however, I got rid of them already in my
> porting, will see what other changes can be fed back..
sounds good
> In other news, some of what I said a few weeks ago is changed now, I put
> psm and channel into the sockaddr as it does look better than using
> setsockopt() for that. However, it still looks slightly different:
>
> struct sockaddr_bt {
> uint8_t bt_len;
> sa_family_t bt_family;
> bdaddr_t bt_bdaddr;
> uint16_t bt_psm;
> uint8_t bt_channel;
> };
>
> ..because I am still using a single sockaddr type for all bluetooth family
> sockets. Protocols that dont use fields just ignore them, but if necessary
> for compatibility a #define can easily be used.
hmm.... i wonder if we can play "union { }" games here. basically, have
struct sockaddr_bt {
uint8_t bt_len;
sa_family_t bt_family;
union {
uint8_t _placeholder[32];
struct {
} _hci;
struct {
} _l2cap;
struct {
} _rfcomm;
} bt_addr;
};
then add appropriate #define's for shortcut access to the union fields.
i can then change freebsd code to use single 'struct sockaddr_bt' as well.
thanks,
max
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?440E0233.7080703>