Hi,
On 09:03 Wed 04 May, Johan Hedberg wrote:
> Hi Claudio,
>
> On Tue, May 03, 2011, Claudio Takahasi wrote:
> > Values defined to LE(public and random) are defined in the Bluetooth
> > Core Specification. For basic rate, there isn't address type concept.
> > The constants introduced by this commit will be used to identify the
> > remote address type, basically to distinguish LE/BR devices before
> > to request the L2CAP connection.
> > ---
> > lib/bluetooth.h | 4 ++++
> > 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/bluetooth.h b/lib/bluetooth.h
> > index 738e07a..98b8f1c 100644
> > --- a/lib/bluetooth.h
> > +++ b/lib/bluetooth.h
> > @@ -130,6 +130,10 @@ typedef struct {
> > #define BDADDR_ALL (&(bdaddr_t) {{0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff}})
> > #define BDADDR_LOCAL (&(bdaddr_t) {{0, 0, 0, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff}})
> >
> > +#define BDADDR_TYPE_LE_PUBLIC 0x00
> > +#define BRADDR_TYPE_LE_RANDOM 0x01
> > +#define BDADDR_TYPE_BR 0xff
>
> Firstly this still needs Marcel's blessing (though I don't really see
> any other solution than an address type with three possible values).
> Secondly, if this is ever going to be added to the L2CAP socket address
> you'd have to have 0x00 as BDADDR_TYPE_BR for backwards compatibility.
>
As Claudio explained in an earlier email, we will need a way to get the
device type when the connection with that device starts
(MGMT_EV_DEVICE_CONNECTED), with hciops we can infer the type if we receive
the LE Meta Event.
My question is: should the event have a bdaddr_type field or a type field?
> Johan
> --
> 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
Cheers,
--
Vinicius
--
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
