> > ---
> > tools/hciconfig.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > 1 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/hciconfig.c b/tools/hciconfig.c
> > index 3f687e0..c97ce44 100644
> > --- a/tools/hciconfig.c
> > +++ b/tools/hciconfig.c
> > @@ -645,8 +645,26 @@ static char *get_minor_device_name(int major, int minor)
> > return "Game";
> > }
> > break;
> > - case 63: /* uncategorised */
> > - return "";
>
> I think that the test for the "Uncategorised" (which seems to be
> misspelled in many places) device class would be better staying here,
> because the same code is used inside hcitool.c. Fixing there would be
> nice too.
>
> Another thing, looks like this "case 63:" is wrong, major device
> class is a 5 bit number, and the uncategorized device class is defined
> as 31. Looks like a legacy from ancient times ;-)
That's exactly why I changed it: the original check below whether to
enter this function ("if ((cls[1] & 0x1f) >= ...") meant <no. of
categories + 1> where +1 meant "Unrecognized", but this is mistaken as
you wrote.
I don't mind fixing it in "hcitool.c" as well, but see followup question
at the bottom.
> > + case 9: /* health */
> > + switch(minor) {
> > + case 0:
> > + return "Undefined";
> > + case 1:
> > + return "Blood Pressure Monitor";
> > + case 2:
> > + return "Thermometer";
> > + case 3:
> > + return "Weighing Scale";
> > + case 4:
> > + return "Glucose Meter";
> > + case 5:
> > + return "Pulse Oximeter";
> > + case 6:
> > + return "Heart/Pulse Rate Monitor";
> > + case 7:
> > + return "Health Data Display";
> > + }
> > + break;
> > }
> > return "Unknown (reserved) minor device class";
> > }
> > @@ -668,7 +686,9 @@ static void cmd_class(int ctl, int hdev, char *opt)
> > "Audio/Video",
> > "Peripheral",
> > "Imaging",
> > - "Uncategorized" };
> > + "Wearable",
> > + "Toy",
> > + "Health" };
> > int s = hci_open_dev(hdev);
> >
> > if (s < 0) {
> > @@ -706,7 +726,9 @@ static void cmd_class(int ctl, int hdev, char *opt)
> > } else
> > printf("Unspecified");
> > printf("\n\tDevice Class: ");
> > - if ((cls[1] & 0x1f) >= sizeof(major_devices) / sizeof(*major_devices))
> > + if (0x1f == cls[1])
>
> This test is inverted, in BlueZ code we use the form: (variable
> operator constant)
>
> > + printf("Uncategorized\n");
> > + else if ((cls[1] & 0x1f) >= sizeof(major_devices) / sizeof(*major_devices))
>
> See above.
Will fix both.
> > printf("Invalid Device Class!\n");
> > else
> > printf("%s, %s\n", major_devices[cls[1] & 0x1f],
> > --
> > 1.6.6.1
> > --
> >
>
>
> Cheers,
Thanks for the comments! I'll send a fixed patch.
But here's a followup question: what's the convention for submitting a
change to a patch - another patch on top of it, or a full replacement
patch? As a reply to this thread, or as new message?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bluetooth" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
