Dear Clancy,
Thank you for your patch. Some nits below.
Am 22.12.23 um 06:45 schrieb 15013537245@xxxxxxx:
From: Clancy Shang <clancy.shang@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Airpod is performing inquiry scans in BR/EDR and advertising in a
unconnectabl mode whit the same public address at the same time.
a*n* unconnectabl*e* mode w*ith*
with this featrue, when found airpod device, set the bredr support,
feat*ur*e
fix it pair fail bug.
Do the Airpods follow the Bluetooth specification, or do they violate
it, and need a workaround?
Signed-off-by: Clancy Shang <clancy.shang@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
src/adapter.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 25 insertions(+)
diff --git a/src/adapter.c b/src/adapter.c
index 022390f0d..488355e9c 100644
--- a/src/adapter.c
+++ b/src/adapter.c
@@ -7066,6 +7066,25 @@ static void adapter_msd_notify(struct btd_adapter *adapter,
}
}
+#define APPLE_INC_VENDOR_ID 0x004c
+
+static bool eir_msd_is_apple_inc(GSList *msd_list)
+{
+ GSList *msd_l, *msd_next;
+
+ for (msd_l = msd_list; msd_l != NULL; msd_l = msd_next) {
+
The blank line seems unnecessary.
+ const struct eir_msd *msd = msd_l->data;
+
+ msd_next = g_slist_next(msd_l);
+
+ if (msd->company == APPLE_INC_VENDOR_ID)
+ return true;
+ }
+
+ return false;
+}
+
static bool is_filter_match(GSList *discovery_filter, struct eir_data *eir_data,
int8_t rssi)
{
@@ -7281,6 +7300,12 @@ void btd_adapter_device_found(struct btd_adapter *adapter,
device_update_last_seen(dev, BDADDR_BREDR, !not_connectable);
}
+ if (eir_msd_is_apple_inc(eir_data.msd_list) && (not_connectable == true)
+ && (bdaddr_type == BDADDR_LE_PUBLIC)) {
No idea, if there is a rule, but other instances put the && on the line
above, and align the condition with the one in the first line.
+ device_set_bredr_support(dev);
+ device_update_last_seen(dev, BDADDR_BREDR, true);
+ }
+
if (eir_data.name != NULL && eir_data.name_complete)
device_store_cached_name(dev, eir_data.name);
Kind regards,
Paul
