Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200705195110.405139-1-anarsoul@gmail.com> <20200705195110.405139-2-anarsoul@gmail.com>
 <DF6CC01A-0282-45E2-A437-2E3E58CC2883@holtmann.org> <CA+E=qVeYT41Wpp4wHgoVFMa9ty-FPsxxvUB-DJDnj07SpWhpjQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <70578F86-20D3-41C7-A968-83B0605D3526@holtmann.org>
In-Reply-To: <70578F86-20D3-41C7-A968-83B0605D3526@holtmann.org>
From:   Vasily Khoruzhick <anarsoul@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 13 Jul 2020 09:00:11 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+E=qVf_8-nXP=nSbtb49bF8SxF6P_A+5ntsUHKKmONccwkSwA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Bluetooth: Add new quirk for broken local ext
 features max_page
To:     Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>,
        Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org>,
        Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@gmail.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        devicetree <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        arm-linux <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-bluetooth <linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:NETWORKING [GENERAL]" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        Ondrej Jirman <megous@megous.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 11:28 PM Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org> wrote:

Hi Marcel,

> maybe just the read sync train params command is broken? Can you change the init code and not send it and see if the rest of the init phase proceeds. I would rather have the secure connections actually tested before dismissing it altogether.

I don't think that I have any devices that support secure connections
to test, I've got only a bluetooth mouse and headphones, both are from
the 2.0 era.

FWIW unofficial recommendation from Realtek to Pine64 was to avoid
using any 4.1+ features on this chip. Unfortunately I don't have any
contacts with Realtek, so I can't confirm that.

> Mind you, there were broken Broadcom implementation of connectionless slave broadcast as well. Maybe this is similar.

I'd prefer to stick to what works unless there's some comprehensive
test that can figure out what's broken.

Regards,
Vasily