Closed Bug 1187249 Opened 4 years ago Closed 4 years ago

Move Bluetooth IPC helpers to ipc/hal

Categories

(Firefox OS Graveyard :: Bluetooth, defect)

ARM
Gonk (Firefox OS)
defect
Not set

Tracking

(firefox42 fixed)

RESOLVED FIXED
FxOS-S4 (07Aug)
Tracking Status
firefox42 --- fixed

People

(Reporter: tzimmermann, Assigned: tzimmermann)

References

Details

Attachments

(4 files)

The files BluetoothDaemonHelpers.{cpp,h} contain helper functions for packing and unpacking IPC message. Many of these functions are unrelated to Bluetooth. They should be moved to ipc/hal.
A small final cleanup, since I'm working on it anyway.
Attachment #8639256 - Flags: review?(shuang)
Comment on attachment 8639252 [details] [diff] [review]
[01] Bug 1187249: Move |DaemonSocketPDUHeader| to hal/ipc

Review of attachment 8639252 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

I'm not sure I have permission to review, but it looks good to me.
Attachment #8639252 - Flags: review?(shuang) → review+
(In reply to Shawn Huang [:shawnjohnjr] from comment #6)
> Comment on attachment 8639252 [details] [diff] [review]
> [01] Bug 1187249: Move |DaemonSocketPDUHeader| to hal/ipc
> 
> Review of attachment 8639252 [details] [diff] [review]:
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> I'm not sure I have permission to review, but it looks good to me.

I mean that code under ipc folder.
Should be OK. It's the code that was in Bluetooth with some renames and small adjustments. And there is a lack of potential reviewers for IPC anyway.
Comment on attachment 8639253 [details] [diff] [review]
[02] Bug 1183249: Move PDU helper functions to ipc/hal

Review of attachment 8639253 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

::: ipc/hal/DaemonSocketPDUHelpers.h
@@ +41,5 @@
> +// byte arrays. Gecko often uses more complex data types, such as
> +// enumators or stuctures. Conversion functions convert between
> +// primitive data and internal Gecko's data types during a PDU's
> +// packing and unpacking.
> +//

Why not use multiline comment style?
Attachment #8639253 - Flags: review?(shuang) → review+
> 
> Why not use multiline comment style?

There's no specific reason. All the other 'block headlines' already use C++ comments, so I just continued this style for consistency.
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.