[pulseaudio-discuss] [RFC v0 03/15] bluetooth: Parse the tree returned by ObjectManager

[Tanu Kaskinen]

On Tue, 2013-01-15 at 08:15 +0100, Mikel Astiz wrote:
> Hi Tanu,
> 
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 8:28 PM, Tanu Kaskinen <tanuk at iki.fi> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-01-08 at 07:14 +0200, Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2013-01-07 at 14:14 +0100, Mikel Astiz wrote:
> >> > On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Tanu Kaskinen <tanuk at iki.fi> wrote:
> >> > > you only check that the name and address are set, why not other
> >> > > properties?
> >> >
> >> > I chose these two because of being non-optional in both BlueZ 4 and 5
> >> > and are at the same time being used by PA. We could also check the
> >> > alias, paired and trusted properties.
> >>
> >> I checked earlier, and it seems that we don't use the alias for
> >> anything, so checking it is unnecessary (and we should stop parsing it
> >> altogether). I haven't checked the paired and trusted properties, are we
> >> using those for anything?
> >>
> >> An example (I don't know if it's the only one) of a property that we
> >> don't check but should check is uuids.
> >
> > Any comments about this? I seems that you didn't incorporate these
> > suggested changes in the updated patches.
> 
> Not sure if you're referring to the UUID only. If that's the case,
> you're right, I haven't changed that since the BlueZ 4 code doesn't do
> it either.
> 
> In any case, I could integrated it here if you consider this
> important: one possible approach would be to add a bool uuids_ready to
> struct pa_bluetooth_device, since we have to distinguish the
> empty-uuid-list case vs property-not-present.

Well, it's probably not important, but it's certainly at least desirable
to catch bluez bugs early.

> Regarding "alias" and "trusted", I think they don't do any harm and
> some other module might potentially be interested in these fields.
> Again, if you want to keep the codebase minimal, we can remove them
> trivially.

I'd like to get them removed, but I don't care very much. So if you
don't want to remove them, I can live with that.

> Besides that, I think the rest of the changes mentioned in this thread
> have been incorporated:
> - Comment removed instead of updated
> - All non-optional properties checked (with the exception of UUID),
> and otherwise fail in parse_device_properties()
> - D-Bus message signature check
> - Style fixes
> - Log trace fixed (s/address/object path/)

Yep, I was only referring to the points in the last mail.

-- 
Tanu