Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] Bluetooth: Introduce HCI_CONN_FLAG_DEVICE_PRIVACY device flag

[Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>]

Hi Luiz,

>>>>> This introduces HCI_CONN_FLAG_DEVICE_PRIVACY which can be used by
>>>>> userspace to indicate to the controller to use Device Privacy Mode to a
>>>>> specific device.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.von.dentz@intel.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> include/net/bluetooth/hci_core.h |  1 +
>>>>> net/bluetooth/mgmt.c             | 12 ++++++++++++
>>>>> 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+)
>>>>> 
>>>>> diff --git a/include/net/bluetooth/hci_core.h b/include/net/bluetooth/hci_core.h
>>>>> index fc93a1907c90..9c94d1c49b25 100644
>>>>> --- a/include/net/bluetooth/hci_core.h
>>>>> +++ b/include/net/bluetooth/hci_core.h
>>>>> @@ -153,6 +153,7 @@ struct bdaddr_list_with_irk {
>>>>> 
>>>>> enum hci_conn_flags {
>>>>>     HCI_CONN_FLAG_REMOTE_WAKEUP,
>>>>> +     HCI_CONN_FLAG_DEVICE_PRIVACY,
>>>> 
>>>> coming this now, I wonder if we better call them FLAG_REMOTE_WAKEUP_SUPPORT and FLAG_DEVICE_PRIVACY_SUPPORT. If I am not mistaken, then these are for indicating support for it.
>>> 
>>> These flags are used in multiple places:
>>> 
>>> hci_dev->conn_flags
>>> hci_conn_params->conn_flags
>>> bdaddr_list_with_flags->flags
>>> 
>>> Which is one of the reason I made them all use  DECLARE_BITMAP(flags,
>>> __HCI_CONN_NUM_FLAGS) so they are in sync, the use of them in
>>> hci_dev->conn_flags means they are supported but in the other 2 it
>>> means they are in use, so I prefer leave as they are.
>> 
>> is my comment wrong? Don’t they always indicate the support for it?
> 
> Support vs Use, anyway I always think about the shortest form for
> defines and having some term like SUPPORT sounds a little superfluous
> for me, but I'm fine adding it if you really think that is necessary
> in this case.

I already applied 1/4 and 2/4. So just re-spin them to make them apply to bluetooth-next.

Regards

Marcel