Hi Johan,
On 11/10/2011 2:33 PM, Johan Hedberg wrote:
Hi Brian,
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011, Brian Gix wrote:
On 11/10/2011 2:07 PM, johan.hedberg@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
- entry = hci_find_adv_entry(hdev,&cp->bdaddr);
- if (entry)
- conn = hci_connect(hdev, LE_LINK,&cp->bdaddr, sec_level,
+ if (cp->addr.type == MGMT_ADDR_BREDR)
+ conn = hci_connect(hdev, ACL_LINK,&cp->addr.bdaddr, sec_level,
auth_type);
else
- conn = hci_connect(hdev, ACL_LINK,&cp->bdaddr, sec_level,
+ conn = hci_connect(hdev, LE_LINK,&cp->addr.bdaddr, sec_level,
auth_type);
Are we differentiating between Dual Mode and BR/EDR here? If we
are, we may want to reverse the logic so that it connects with an
LE_LINK if the addr type == MGMT_ADDR_LE, and then connects to an
ACL_LINK otherwise (as the else).
Unless this is being implimented as a bitmask, in which case the if
would be "if (cp->addr.type& MGMT_ADDR_BREDR)", at which point I
have no objection.
Because of course Dual mode devices must use the ACL_LINK between
each other.
The idea here isn't to push connection type selection to the kernel but
to expect user-space to explicitly say how it wants to connect. If
user-space wants to connect over LE it'll provide either ADDR_LE_PUBLIC
or ADDR_LE_PRIVATE. So it doesn't really matter what way around the
if-statement is formulated (I chose this way around since it meant one
comparison instead of two).
OK, I'm fine with that.
--
Brian Gix
bgix@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum
--
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
