Max,
--- On Fri, 7/5/10, Max Krasnyansky <maxk@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Max Krasnyansky <maxk@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: multiple HCI_UART protocols over hci_ldisc
> To: "Pavan Savoy" <pavan_savoy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: "linux-bluetooth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-bluetooth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Marcel Holtmann" <marcel@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Friday, 7 May, 2010, 4:00 AM
> On 05/06/2010 03:04 PM, Pavan Savoy
> wrote:
> > Hi Marcel,
> >
> > I am working on a line discipline which in many
> respects is similar to the hci_ldisc, but only extended to
> do plenty of other functionality.
> >
> > One road block which i have hit is to support multiple
> devices/or as Alan Cox puts it "avoid single device limits"
> >
> > So, in somewhat relation to this, I wanted to ask, If
> in a system I have 2 UARTs both connected to BT chips but
> only from different vendors say TI/HCI-Ll and broadcomm with
> BCSP ..
> >
> > Can I have those 2 protocols on top of HCI-ldisc on
> different UARTs at the same time?
> > Is something like that feasible?
> Sure. You'll get two separate HCI devices in that case.
But there seems to be only 1,
static struct hci_uart_proto *hup[HCI_UART_MAX_PROTO];
int hci_uart_register_proto(struct hci_uart_proto *p)
{
if (p->id >= HCI_UART_MAX_PROTO)
return -EINVAL;
if (hup[p->id])
return -EEXIST;
hup[p->id] = p;
return 0;
}
So, If suppose I have 2 UARTs both on which HCI-Ldisc exists, and I try say HCI-LL on both, Now won't I get a -EEXIST for the 2nd HCI-LL ?
I am a bit confused, can you explain in brief ?
Is there a possibility of copies of *hup[HCI_UART_MAX_PROTO] for each UART?
> Max
>
--
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
