Erich,

If you fixed something independent when you were working on CBOR, I would ask 
you to push the separately.
CBOR depends on length & buffer logic. It is ok to wait and submit them 
together.

Pat

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Keane, Erich
> Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 12:39 PM
> To: Lankswert, Patrick
> Cc: iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org; jonc at osg.samsung.com;
> jihwan.seo at samsung.com
> Subject: Re: [dev] To add payload length in CAInfo_t for block-wise transfer.
> 
> I actually have exactly this kind of patch already on my local machine as a 
> part
> of the CBOR changes.  I was giong to push them together (Convert
> Connectivity to only deal in Binary, Convert RI/C++ to use CBOR instead of
> JSON), but I can do that separately if you'd like.
> 
> 
> On Fri, 2015-06-12 at 13:37 +0000, Lankswert, Patrick wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: iotivity-dev-bounces at lists.iotivity.org
> > > [mailto:iotivity-dev-bounces at lists.iotivity.org] On Behalf Of Jon A.
> > > Cruz
> > > Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 1:36 AM
> > > To: jihwan.seo at samsung.com; iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org
> > > Subject: Re: [dev] To add payload length in CAInfo_t for block-wise
> transfer.
> > >
> > > On 06/11/2015 07:30 PM, ??? wrote:
> > > > Dear All
> > > >
> > > > Hi.
> > > >
> > > > To get payload length in CA Layer,
> > > >
> > > > the method related to strlen / strcpy is used like below.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "size_t len = strlen(info.payload);"
> > > >
> > > > but, if NULL characteristic is included in the payload.
> > > > CA can't get accurate length of the payload through these methods.
> > > >
> > > > so..I think upper layer have to express the payload length through
> > > > below
> > > change.
> > > >
> > > > typedef struct
> > > > {
> > > >
> > > >      CAMessageType_t type;
> > > >      uint16_t messageId;
> > > >      CATokent_t token;
> > > >      uint8_t tokenLength;
> > > >      CAHeaderOption_t *option;
> > > >      uint8_t numOptions;
> > > >      CAPayload_t payload;
> > > >
> > > > *    size_t payloadLength;         // new member of the structure*
> > > >
> > > > } CAInfo_t;
> > > >
> > > > but, we should discuss it much.
> > > >
> > > > since RI layer also have to consider adding RI API for payloadLength.
> > > >
> > > > if you have some opinion.
> > > >
> > > > please let me know.
> > > >
> > > > ps. I have registerd the JIRA -
> > > > https://jira.iotivity.org/browse/IOT-561
> > >
> > >
> > > Conceptually much of the code at various layers had been confusing
> > > c-strings for buffers. There are some significant differences and
> > > you've hit upon some of them.
> > >
> > > This had been pointed out several times in code reviews, and should
> > > have been followed-up on already. The JIRA ticket can help with that.
> >
> > Yes! I am not sure where this was introduced, but the payload is block of
> arbitrary octets. It could be a jpeg, JSON, CBOR or other. The CoAP PDU has
> length and buffer. The string functions should never been used or
> introduced.
> >
> > I am not sure if it pre-dated the CA rewrite, but it should not have 
> > survived
> it. I pointed it out in several CA reviews.
> >
> > Pat
> > _______________________________________________
> > iotivity-dev mailing list
> > iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org
> > https://lists.iotivity.org/mailman/listinfo/iotivity-dev

Reply via email to