From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.nearlyone.de (mail.nearlyone.de [46.163.114.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6FC013FC4 for ; Sun, 29 Aug 2021 19:37:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Mailerdaemon) with ESMTPSA id C0F635E3FE; Sun, 29 Aug 2021 21:37:29 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monom.org; s=dkim; t=1630265849; h=from:subject:date:message-id:to:cc:mime-version:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:references; bh=UBRuE8nXNfBweMMRzIhJuLhZ1irs1NpsLORnZQBKeYQ=; b=wrIugRdQfDh1rgKvHjOwhrdH0nmWcIcXC6Mqj2yrEsZ/xXiatClg37JiG/ZRab2tAZw5Rz DtT6cWWEP2frTx2oQ5nj07ggqVAukqKrscetDNk+V2j6y8ljBwzvrciPLiVv0T40FxjJO6 pbrrGvNY/FW90KLOaw2xqGIVPtxp7ZZnqLBwiebPj1yRK+WEPPopq18+TXYFbsL55PDj/5 9XatqxXlLYfhdljG23eN2wHQdrmaQQ49JBJRXj/qyUcqD2Aphf/02y+Y5NxvlAMJW46VBR ZOV3AExjSpwo8wzG682TLw+cANZ8tMoL5kCboJP1frzy8NpJvPoXo7nRp2iZjQ== Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2021 21:37:29 +0200 From: Daniel Wagner To: =?utf-8?B?0KHRgtGA0LDRhdC40ZrQsCDQoNCw0LTQuNGb?= Cc: connman Subject: Re: [PATCH] Respect EnableOnlineCheck globally Message-ID: <20210829193729.txyzcqfavmyeaq2n@beryllium.lan> References: <20210828171657.2qxolbym36hdiuhu@prancingpony> <20210828173427.7ctqrpj2w2ldrkla@prancingpony> <20210829175411.u7gfenrvleehvp7v@beryllium.lan> <20210829193230.rmpb6ks3ocim5c62@prancingpony> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: connman@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20210829193230.rmpb6ks3ocim5c62@prancingpony> X-Last-TLS-Session-Version: TLSv1.3 On Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 09:32:30PM +0200, Страхиња Радић wrote: > On 21/08/29 07:54, Daniel Wagner wrote: > > This was the only place I found where we call > > __connman_service_wispr_start() without the EnableOnlineCheck test. > > There's one more place, src/service.c:3728-3734 (set_property function). Good catch! I think we should introduce a helper function for this instead opqen coding the check 3 times.