On 11.11.2011 11:52, Patrik Flykt wrote: > On Tue, 2011-11-08 at 15:30 +0100, Daniel Wagner wrote: >> There are cases where technology->pending_reply is set but the >> corresponding technology->pending_timeout not. The technology enabled >> was called from the Manager and the device was enabled right away. > > Patch looks good. Should we be extra suspicious and check the > 'if (technology->pending_timeout > 0)' part outside of the > 'if (technology->pending_reply != NULL)' block? Or am I being just too > paranoid?
Being paranoid sounds reasonable to me :) I'll apply the paranoid version then. cheers, daniel _______________________________________________ connman mailing list [email protected] http://lists.connman.net/listinfo/connman
