Return-Path: Message-ID: <1333042298.1870.220.camel@aeonflux> Subject: Re: [RFC 2/3] Bluetooth: Add dst_type parameter to hci_connect From: Marcel Holtmann To: Andre Guedes Cc: linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 19:31:38 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <1332892776-12060-1-git-send-email-andre.guedes@openbossa.org> <1332892776-12060-3-git-send-email-andre.guedes@openbossa.org> <20120329091236.GA22600@x220> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Andre, > > On Tue, Mar 27, 2012, Andre Guedes wrote: > >> + le->dst_type = (dst_type == MGMT_ADDR_LE_RANDOM) ? > >> + ADDR_LE_DEV_RANDOM : ADDR_LE_DEV_PUBLIC; > > > > You might want to make a simple helper function for the type conversion. > > > > Also, I'm not so sure it's a good idea to directly reuse mgmt API > > defines for the L2CAP socket interface. The values may in the end be the > > same but probably there should be separate defines in l2cap.h. > > I'm not sure too. > > I think it would be better we define address type macros in > bluetooth.h and replace its prefix by BDADDR_TYPE_. So we would have > something like this in bluetooth.h: > > +/* BD Address type */ > +#define BDADDR_TYPE_BREDR 0x00 > +#define BDADDR_TYPE_LE_PUBLIC 0x01 > +#define BDADDR_TYPE_LE_RANDOM 0x02 > +#define BDADDR_TYPE_INVALID 0xff what is INVALID for? That seems like a pointless value to have. > What do you think? I also get the feeling that these are a bit long. What is the benefit of using BDADDR_TYPE_ namespace. Would not something like this be better: BDADDR_BREDR 0x00 BDADDR_LE_PUBLIC 0x01 BDADDR_LE_RANDOM 0x02 Regards Marcel