Return-Path: Subject: Re: [PATCH] MCAP implementation for BlueZ From: Santiago Carot-Nemesio To: "Gustavo F. Padovan" Cc: Santiago Carot-Nemesio , linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20100504200657.GC26732@vigoh> References: <1272962595-4108-1-git-send-email-sancane@gmail.com> <20100504200657.GC26732@vigoh> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Wed, 05 May 2010 09:45:41 +0200 Message-ID: <1273045541.2105.27.camel@mosquito> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi, El mar, 04-05-2010 a las 17:06 -0300, Gustavo F. Padovan escribió: > Hi Santiago, > > * Santiago Carot-Nemesio [2010-05-04 10:43:15 +0200]: > > > This patch enables MCAP in BlueZ. > > Current implementation provides support for standard op. codes. Clock > > Synchronization protocol is not yet supported. > > --- > > Makefile.am | 11 +- > > acinclude.m4 | 6 + > > mcap/mcap.c | 2146 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > mcap/mcap.h | 176 +++++ > > mcap/mcap_lib.h | 162 +++++ > > 5 files changed, 2500 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > create mode 100644 mcap/mcap.c > > create mode 100644 mcap/mcap.h > > create mode 100644 mcap/mcap_lib.h > > 2500+ lines is too big for review. MCAP is way complicated to > understand completely. I suggest you to split this patch and send > smaller ones for each feature of MCAP you implement, then we can review > each piece and not at once. You are rigth, I know it, but please, remember that it is a new specification implemented from scratch, there were not any similar profile in BlueZ wich i could take as reference point. I have done a lot of changes in the architecture, interfaces, etc. until I found what IMHO is a presentable implementation. Sending patches with a non definitive implementation could have full of noise the mailing list, I think that its better to have a base implementation to discuss about. I'm thinking that it may be interesting put my git in public to everybody can see all development process, commit-by-commit. I have not problem in doing that. > > Also a MCAP test tool would be interesting to help on the > review/merge/qualification process. Do you guys have one? Or are you > planning to do one? We have some home-made tools and scripts for testing MCAP, if you are interested i'll put them in plubic git too. Thanks in advance for your feedback. Best regards.