Return-Path: Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 18:57:18 -0300 From: Vinicius Costa Gomes To: linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Bluetooth: Add link_type information to the mgmt Connected event Message-ID: <20110616215718.GA23537@piper.indt.org> References: <1307745283-12160-1-git-send-email-vinicius.gomes@openbossa.org> <20110616205639.GD2594@joana> <20110616210924.GA14812@dell.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20110616210924.GA14812@dell.ger.corp.intel.com> Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Johan, On 00:09 Fri 17 Jun, Johan Hedberg wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Jun 16, 2011, Gustavo F. Padovan wrote: > > > -int mgmt_connected(u16 index, bdaddr_t *bdaddr) > > > +int mgmt_connected(u16 index, bdaddr_t *bdaddr, u8 link_type) > > > { > > > struct mgmt_ev_connected ev; > > > > > > bacpy(&ev.bdaddr, bdaddr); > > > + ev.link_type = link_type; > > > > > > return mgmt_event(MGMT_EV_CONNECTED, index, &ev, sizeof(ev), NULL); > > > } > > > > Seems good to me. Anyone else has comments on it? > > It seems this is using the SCO_LINK, ESCO_LINK, ACL_LINK, and LE_LINK > defines, right? If we're going to add an address or link type I think > it'd be good to have the random vs public information for LE addresses > included from the start. Yes, we have to think about exporting the type of the address, I just am not sure that the Connected event is the right place, for me, the story this event tells is more like: "we are connected to device X over link Y". I don't know how to fit address type information in that message. The Device Found event, on the other hand, seems more appropriate for address type information. > > Johan > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bluetooth" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Cheers, -- Vinicius