Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <000f01d046d2$2e1048c0$8a30da40$@samsung.com> References: <000f01d046d2$2e1048c0$8a30da40$@samsung.com> Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 17:06:41 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Query reagrding the MAS Instance Information Support patchset From: Luiz Augusto von Dentz To: Gowtham Anandha Babu Cc: "linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Gowtham, On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Gowtham Anandha Babu wrote: > Hi Luiz, > > I have submitted a patch set to add support for MAP MAS Instance feature on > the month of October. Below are the links. > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bluez.kernel/54106 > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bluez.kernel/53974 > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bluez.kernel/53975 > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bluez.kernel/53976 > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bluez.kernel/53977 > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bluez.kernel/54110 > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bluez.kernel/53979 > > But the suggestion provided was to wait until the Multiple MAS Instance > support. > Why can't we implement the multiple MAS Instance support on top of this? > Some fixes and cleanups are needed in the above submitted patches. I will > fix that. > Shall I resend the same? > What do you think? I still have plans to implement the folder structure as I mentioned, this would basically mean no API changes are needed, this would conflict with your changes. I have been some patches for this already which should be ready for submission next week. -- Luiz Augusto von Dentz