Hi Luiz,
>>>>>> please use “Bluetooth: “ prefix for the subject.
>>>>>
>>>>> ack.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When the extended advertisement feature is enabled, a hardcoded min and
>>>>>>> max interval of 0x8000 is used. This patches fixes this issue by using
>>>>>>> the configured min/max value.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This was validated by setting min/max in main.conf and making sure the
>>>>>>> right setting is applied:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> < HCI Command: LE Set Extended Advertising Parameters (0x08|0x0036) plen
>>>>>>> 25 #93 [hci0] 10.953011
>>>>>>> …
>>>>>>> Min advertising interval: 181.250 msec (0x0122)
>>>>>>> Max advertising interval: 181.250 msec (0x0122)
>>>>>>> …
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Abhishek Pandit-Subedi <abhishekpandit@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Daniel Winkler <danielwinkler@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Alain Michaud <alainm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Reviewed-by lines go after your Signed-off-by.
>>>>>
>>>>> ack.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> net/bluetooth/hci_request.c | 10 ++++++----
>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/net/bluetooth/hci_request.c b/net/bluetooth/hci_request.c
>>>>>>> index 29decd7e8051..08818b9bf89f 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/net/bluetooth/hci_request.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/net/bluetooth/hci_request.c
>>>>>>> @@ -1799,8 +1799,9 @@ int __hci_req_setup_ext_adv_instance(struct hci_request *req, u8 instance)
>>>>>>> int err;
>>>>>>> struct adv_info *adv_instance;
>>>>>>> bool secondary_adv;
>>>>>>> - /* In ext adv set param interval is 3 octets */
>>>>>>> - const u8 adv_interval[3] = { 0x00, 0x08, 0x00 };
>>>>>>> + /* In ext adv set param interval is 3 octets in le format */
>>>>>>> + const __le32 min_adv_interval = cpu_to_le32(hdev->le_adv_min_interval);
>>>>>>> + const __le32 max_adv_interval = cpu_to_le32(hdev->le_adv_max_interval);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Scrap the const here.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd like to understand why it isn't prefered to use const when you
>>>>> don't intend to modify it in the code.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And it is wrong since your hdev->le_adv_{min,max}_interval is actually __u16. So that first needs to be extended to a __u16 value.
>>>>>
>>>>> The macro actually leads to a function call that has a __u32 as a
>>>>> parameter so the __u16 gets upcasted to a __u32 already.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That said, if we have this in the Load Default System Configuration list, we should extended it to __le32 there as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree, this means the range of default system configuration may not
>>>>> be sufficient to accept all possible values that the newer command
>>>>> supports, although I think this is a separate issue from what this
>>>>> patch is trying to solve.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> if (instance > 0) {
>>>>>>> adv_instance = hci_find_adv_instance(hdev, instance);
>>>>>>> @@ -1833,8 +1834,9 @@ int __hci_req_setup_ext_adv_instance(struct hci_request *req, u8 instance)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> memset(&cp, 0, sizeof(cp));
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - memcpy(cp.min_interval, adv_interval, sizeof(cp.min_interval));
>>>>>>> - memcpy(cp.max_interval, adv_interval, sizeof(cp.max_interval));
>>>>>>> + /* take least significant 3 bytes */
>>>>>>> + memcpy(cp.min_interval, &min_adv_interval, sizeof(cp.min_interval));
>>>>>>> + memcpy(cp.max_interval, &max_adv_interval, sizeof(cp.max_interval));
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is dangerous and I think it actually break in case of unaligned access platforms.
>>>>>
>>>>> Since it is in le format already and the 3 bytes from the cmd struct
>>>>> are raw, I'm not sure how this can be dangerous. It effectively
>>>>> yields the exact same results as your suggestions below.
>>>>
>>>> In zephyr we end up doing helper functions for 24 bits:
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/blob/master/include/sys/byteorder.h#L316
>>>>
>>>> I guess that is safer in terms of alignment access and it would work
>>>> independent of the host order which apparently was not the case in the
>>>> code above since it doesn't do the conversion to le32 (or perhaps the
>>>> intervals are already in le32), anyway having something like that is
>>>> probably much simpler to maintain given that most intervals use for
>>>> things like ISO are also 24 bits long.
>>> I like this. Would you put this in hci.h or keep to a lower scope?
>>>
>>> static inline void hci_cpu_to_le24(__u32 val, __u8 dst[3])
>>> {
>>> dst[0] = val & 0xff;
>>> dst[1] = (val & 0xff00) >> 8;
>>> dst[2] = (val & 0xff0000) >> 16;
>>> }
>>
>> hmmm, how many 24-bit fields do we have in Bluetooth HCI spec? If it is just one, then lets keep it close to the usage, if not, I have also no object to put it in a higher level.
>
> These are the instances of 24-bit fields:
>
> include/net/bluetooth/hci.h: __u8 min_interval[3];
> include/net/bluetooth/hci.h: __u8 max_interval[3];
> include/net/bluetooth/hci.h: __u8 m_interval[3];
> include/net/bluetooth/hci.h: __u8 s_interval[3];
> include/net/bluetooth/hci.h: __u8 cig_sync_delay[3];
> include/net/bluetooth/hci.h: __u8 cis_sync_delay[3];
> include/net/bluetooth/hci.h: __u8 m_latency[3];
> include/net/bluetooth/hci.h: __u8 s_latency[3];
>
> I guess they all could benefit from having such a helper so we don't
> have to resort in cpu_to_32 + memcpy.
I see, the new ISO channel support also used 24-bit variables heavily.
Regards
Marcel
