Return-Path: Message-ID: <1335287059.16897.398.camel@aeonflux> Subject: Re: [RFC v3 1/5] Bluetooth: Add address type to struct sockaddr_l2 From: Marcel Holtmann To: Andre Guedes Cc: linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 19:04:19 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <1333646241-12574-1-git-send-email-andre.guedes@openbossa.org> <1333646241-12574-2-git-send-email-andre.guedes@openbossa.org> <1333648179.16897.16.camel@aeonflux> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Andre, > > On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Marcel Holtmann wrote: > >> Hi Andre, > >> > >>> This patch adds the address type info to struct sockaddr_l2 so > >>> user-space can inform the remote device address type required > >>> to establish LE connections. > >>> > >>> Soon, instead of looking the advertising cache up to discover the > >>> address type, we'll use this address type info to establish LE > >>> connections. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Andre Guedes > >>> --- > >>> include/net/bluetooth/l2cap.h | 1 + > >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/include/net/bluetooth/l2cap.h b/include/net/bluetooth/l2cap.h > >>> index f6f0500..d14967e 100644 > >>> --- a/include/net/bluetooth/l2cap.h > >>> +++ b/include/net/bluetooth/l2cap.h > >>> @@ -57,6 +57,7 @@ struct sockaddr_l2 { > >>> __le16 l2_psm; > >>> bdaddr_t l2_bdaddr; > >>> __le16 l2_cid; > >>> + __u8 l2_bdaddr_type; > >>> }; > >> > >> so I am trying to come up with a better name for this value. It feels a > >> little bit too long to me. > >> > >> I was considering l2_bdtype, but that is not really semantically correct > >> here. Or would it be fine? We could do l2_bdatype, but that does not > >> really make it any better either. > > > > Yes, it is a little big to me too. But that was the best name I could > > find. Other names just don't clearly say what this field means. > > So, do we keep this name? I honestly have not made up mind. Send a new patch anyway. Regards Marcel