Return-Path: <cyrus@holtmann.org>
Subject: Re: [rfc]btusb with SCO support
From: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>
To: Oliver Neukum <oliver@neukum.org>
Cc: linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <200808011357.16868.oliver@neukum.org>
References: <200807311452.24166.oliver@neukum.org>
	 <94E72E02-9C26-4FB4-8E0E-414B08E43F6A@holtmann.org>
	 <200808011357.16868.oliver@neukum.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2008 19:45:18 +0200
Message-Id: <1217612718.7819.7.camel@californication>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-bluetooth.vger.kernel.org>

Hi Oliver,

> > Both table updates should be a separate patch and we can even submit  
> > that for 2.6.27 inclusion. I was just to lazy to do that, but I have  
> > it on my todo list, but the Simple Pairing support had higher priority.
> 
> This patch implements the quirks from hci_usb in btusb, too.
> 
> --- linux-2.6.22/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c	2008-08-01 10:53:38.000000000 +0200
> +++ linux-2.6.26/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c	2008-08-01 13:47:54.000000000 +0200
> @@ -41,21 +41,108 @@
>  #define BT_DBG(D...)
>  #endif
>  
> -#define VERSION "0.1"
> +#define VERSION "0.3"

the version number increase to 0.3 is bogus, it should be 0.2.

> +module_param(override_ignore, bool, 0644);
> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(override_ignore, "Drive blacklisted devices");

Why do we need this one? What is it good for?

Regards

Marcel