[pulseaudio-discuss] [PATCH v0 00/16] Bluetooth cleanup and bugfixes

[Tanu Kaskinen]

On Fri, 2012-10-12 at 05:19 +0200, Mikel Astiz wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Mikel Astiz <mikel.astiz.oss at gmail.com> wrote:
> > From: Mikel Astiz <mikel.astiz at bmw-carit.de>
> >
> > Another long patchset on Bluetooth, this time containing code cleanup and bugfixes. One of them, the isse solved in patch 4, was recently introduced in my previous patchset. Besides that, the main contribution is patch 14, which was a difficult-to-track double free.
> >
> > Patch 1 was inspired during testing, but the rest of the patches do not actually depend on it. I am not able to reproduce the issue any more, but the change seems to make sense anyway.
> >
> > Mikel Astiz (16):
> >   sink, source: Fix missing pa_asyncmsgq_ref()
> >   bluetooth: Ignore Device.DisconnectRequested
> >   bluetooth: Trivial function rename
> >   bluetooth: Fix potential assertion failure
> >   bluetooth: Don't find device if set profile is off
> >   bluetooth: Release transport in stop_thread()
> >   bluetooth: Unlink sink-sources in stop_thread()
> >   bluetooth: Use helper functions to move streams
> >   bluetooth: Move streams during shutdown
> >   bluetooth: Check return value of init_profile()
> >   bluetooth: Check return value of start_thread()
> >   bluetooth: Add reference counting to transports
> >   bluetooth: Add hook to tell transport was removed
> >   bluetooth: Fix double free with reference counting
> >   bluetooth: Set to off if transport removed
> >   bluetooth: Set to off instead of failing module load
> >
> >  src/modules/bluetooth/bluetooth-util.c          |  45 ++--
> >  src/modules/bluetooth/bluetooth-util.h          |   7 +-
> >  src/modules/bluetooth/module-bluetooth-device.c | 259 +++++++++++++-----------
> >  src/pulsecore/sink.c                            |   9 +
> >  src/pulsecore/source.c                          |   9 +
> >  5 files changed, 188 insertions(+), 141 deletions(-)
> >
> > --
> > 1.7.11.4
> >
> 
> Any feedback regarding these patches?

Patches 2-7 looked good, I've pushed them now. I'll write a separate
mail about patch 8, and then possibly continue the review.

-- 
Tanu