Subject: Re: RFC: btusb firmware load help
From: Marcel Holtmann <holtmann@linux.intel.com>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <lrodriguez@atheros.com>
Cc: linux-bluetooth <linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
	Deepak Dhamdhere <Deepak.Dhamdhere@Atheros.com>,
	Sree Durbha <Sree.Durbha@Atheros.com>
In-Reply-To: <20100924230730.GB6566@tux>
References: <20100924230730.GB6566@tux>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 10:23:01 +0200
Message-ID: <1286266981.17473.33.camel@aeonflux>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

Hi Luis,

> Marcel, I was just poked about this thread:
> 
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-bluetooth/msg06087.html
> 
> The hack is required because our BT hardware does not accept HCI commands
> when the device is plugged in. If I understood your position you did not
> want to accept the patch because our BT USB devices are violating the
> specification by not acceping HCI commands and yet claiming to be BT
> devices, is that right?

you don't have to accept HCI commands when your device has no firmware
loaded. That is just fine. However at that point you should not claim to
be a Bluetooth H:2 device with USB Bluetooth descriptors.

Just having different USB PIDs for without firmware and with firmware
stages would have been fine. The ancient Broadcom 203x devices even got
that part right.

So what about sticking with the current VID:PID for the device without
firmware and we blacklist it in btusb driver. And then the firmware
loading ensures that after reset it uses a different PID for the device
with valid HCI firmware.

Regards

Marcel