Hi Marcel,
On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 1:12 PM Marcel Holtmann <marcel@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Luiz,
>
> >>> This introduces HCI_CONN_FLAG_DEVICE_PRIVACY which can be used by
> >>> userspace to indicate to the controller to use Device Privacy Mode to a
> >>> specific device.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.von.dentz@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>> ---
> >>> include/net/bluetooth/hci_core.h | 1 +
> >>> net/bluetooth/mgmt.c | 12 ++++++++++++
> >>> 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/include/net/bluetooth/hci_core.h b/include/net/bluetooth/hci_core.h
> >>> index fc93a1907c90..9c94d1c49b25 100644
> >>> --- a/include/net/bluetooth/hci_core.h
> >>> +++ b/include/net/bluetooth/hci_core.h
> >>> @@ -153,6 +153,7 @@ struct bdaddr_list_with_irk {
> >>>
> >>> enum hci_conn_flags {
> >>> HCI_CONN_FLAG_REMOTE_WAKEUP,
> >>> + HCI_CONN_FLAG_DEVICE_PRIVACY,
> >>
> >> coming this now, I wonder if we better call them FLAG_REMOTE_WAKEUP_SUPPORT and FLAG_DEVICE_PRIVACY_SUPPORT. If I am not mistaken, then these are for indicating support for it.
> >
> > These flags are used in multiple places:
> >
> > hci_dev->conn_flags
> > hci_conn_params->conn_flags
> > bdaddr_list_with_flags->flags
> >
> > Which is one of the reason I made them all use DECLARE_BITMAP(flags,
> > __HCI_CONN_NUM_FLAGS) so they are in sync, the use of them in
> > hci_dev->conn_flags means they are supported but in the other 2 it
> > means they are in use, so I prefer leave as they are.
>
> is my comment wrong? Don’t they always indicate the support for it?
Support vs Use, anyway I always think about the shortest form for
defines and having some term like SUPPORT sounds a little superfluous
for me, but I'm fine adding it if you really think that is necessary
in this case.
> Regards
>
> Marcel
>
--
Luiz Augusto von Dentz
