Return-Path: From: Arnd Bergmann To: "Par-Gunnar Hjalmdahl" Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] mfd: Add UART support for the ST-Ericsson CG2900. Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 02:09:11 +0200 Cc: Alan Cox , linus.walleij@stericsson.com, linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Lukasz.Rymanowski@tieto.com References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-Id: <201010300209.11220.arnd@arndb.de> Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Friday 29 October 2010, Par-Gunnar Hjalmdahl wrote: > I might have been a bit too quick there. > The actual channel matching and packet creation is done in hci_h4.c > while ldisc registration is done in hci_ldisc.c. > So it might to be enough to create a new hci_h4-cg2900.c (or similar > name) that can separate the right channels. That sounds good, but would that still be h4? There are currently six UART protocols that have drivers in Linux: H4, bcsp, 3Weire, h4ds, ll and ath3k. Can cg2900 be simply another one of those, or is it different from the others? > We must however do changes > to hci_ldisc as well since it seems to always register to the > Bluetooth stack here, which we definitely don't want since that is > handled by btcg2900.c. Can you elaborate? You said earlier that cg2900 is a standard HCI with some extensions. If that's the case, why do you need your own btcg2900 driver to handle bluetooth instead of the regular hci code? > Also note that this ldisc issue is only valid when using UART as > transport. We will also support SPI and then we will probably run into > completely new, interesting problems. :-) Is the link layer on SPI different from the UART variant? Maybe you cna just add a SPI TTY driver if that doesn't exist yet and bind the same ldisc to the SPI device. Arnd