Hi Marcel/Johan/Gustavo, On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Claudio Takahasi <claudio.takahasi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Marcel, > > On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 7:00 AM, Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Hi Marcel, >> >> On Fri, Apr 15, 2011, Marcel Holtmann wrote: >>> > > + BDADDR_TYPE_LE_PUBLIC, >>> > > + BRADDR_TYPE_LE_RANDOM >>> > > +}; >>> >>> I am also not sure the we should have this BR/EDR differentiation since >>> the specification only talks about public and random addresses. And we >>> should follow the specification type value here. I am against >>> introducing our enum here. >> >> The HCI specification only has values for public and random because >> everywhere they are used it is already clear from the context (the HCI >> command or event in question) if we're talking about LE or BR/EDR. We on >> the other hand don't have this contextual information with the >> mgmt_pair_device command. Saying "public" there could mean both BR/EDR >> public or LE public, i.e. an enum with just two possible values is not >> going to be of much use to us. Because of this difference between our >> API and that of HCI I don't think it's fair to apply the HCI >> convention/restriction to us. >> >> Johan >> > > I added 3 values because it gives more flexibility. Possible use cases: > - Whitelist needs the address type > - SMP > - As input to decide to store or not information about the device > since private address can change every 15minutes > > ÂAt the moment we only need to know if the address is basic rate or LE > to select the discovery type: SDP or LE Discovery primary. For > pairing, Vinicius is using the kernel advertising cache to discover > the address type, passing the address type could avoid wrong fallback > to basic rate if the entry is not found in the cache. > > Claudio > Any objection to add the address type in the MGMT_EV_DEVICE_CONNECTED event? Inside event.c there are a lot of get_adapter_and_device calls, for some contexts it creates a new device object if it doesn't exist(eg: incoming pairing). But the type is required to create a new device, otherwise it will not be possible to trigger the reverse service search. Obtain the type later based on the link key type will not work, unless we create a device with unknown type to be able to call the agent methods. BTW, is there a reason why it is necessary to "force" device creation(get_adapter_and_device option)? In my opinion we could create the device(if it doesn't exist) it inside btd_event_conn_complete only. There is a potential race condition: other application calling RemoveDevice, but for this case reference counting should work. Currently, controllers doesn't support simultaneous BR/EDR/LE, this is another argument to export the address type or connection type through management interface avoiding future changes on the API. Regards, Claudio. -- 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
