From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA5E5C2BAEE for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 19:32:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B39820836 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 19:32:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="tcJKHfPK" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727154AbgCXTc1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2020 15:32:27 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-f68.google.com ([209.85.166.68]:33587 "EHLO mail-io1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726618AbgCXTc1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2020 15:32:27 -0400 Received: by mail-io1-f68.google.com with SMTP id o127so19391650iof.0 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 12:32:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=UBZU0spNRefMxT7GtEmfGVi6VUQoaXSy7zyWgYJQoQw=; b=tcJKHfPKAN7KqwRwJ/ZqUKWGH5+CnmbAmzSaLzcdJh3ke1Ex4rBOsJ2hf/4zHZYOl4 pLRKSp0HLJl7+fPvbpqbMrKfvJD06jMw3Q5fhy+PKX8oMuLyUtq22FnMdmfCP3RZUHiL 7cD5KS8PN0HmI9Q0nZSD1rAkginEANx6menzKTCAmXklc9SiuWBdB2tatKQJrout95OE DJLYR3RmSTIgIaAc/5oUxIvywtB5IA54o1wOZ82lQojCfngo/2PUanZjkwnDAO3E6XtO egB2opjETgZnQOKD4OZJ/i08J/GKyNzsqMvw2Cg2y7YWbSIOEigCVuOhM31GkfNk/Zbn hcCA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=UBZU0spNRefMxT7GtEmfGVi6VUQoaXSy7zyWgYJQoQw=; b=dyLdXpnxMCjZt4rav2tHa0pwmbR0wiCpViX7f7o5rz4SM9ZL0q60nzgnKe15ThS3Lf FNXZUFKb71bdHY0j20Y4s2ys7Es5UayuZBqiXU8TeKUEQUz6S0LOWQ4WB7hgTw/7pLud xzBGpGkNEwyKezMwmmsDghXNShsIvyH2QXz6rQ7uMOhRFuxmj/2ZsPWTnB5vLWdCxHhM WDpoxLWct+xfxSsrBtAEt7NCs6xnLhv52IFOqn366TE3GYPfjgabrqMAlp+ei4MiRgpy S7hspAjyubvaqY5znS52eb4NtqeahU9VOH1lTbX5xbL32hn3ma3rkfpGLGwjskCH5i2g bDSg== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ1KfCGpW3F2agPg0h6cfH3bxOsegh9QcSMIBuohuzqAxwj4Yzi+ MoUKIZ+w/67/neZz9g4grKTNQ6u34Vh39HIX4WVLBw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vspMIThkZMvjN0TV9g8qWucprIzlJD/MqLtia/5hebL3EdoCu3I0ExyZmVQrAAG4KUeUzMuzJbkEbPomPy6epI= X-Received: by 2002:a02:3842:: with SMTP id v2mr6539922jae.9.1585078345721; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 12:32:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200323072824.254495-1-mcchou@chromium.org> <20200323002820.v1.1.I0e975833a6789e8acc74be7756cd54afde6ba98c@changeid> <04021BE3-63F7-4B19-9F0E-145785594E8C@holtmann.org> <421d27670f2736c88e8c0693e3ff7c0dcfceb40b.camel@perches.com> <57C56801-7F3B-478A-83E9-1D2376C60666@holtmann.org> <03547be94c4944ca672c7aef2dd38b0fb1eedc84.camel@perches.com> <643C6020-2FC5-4EEA-8F64-5D4B7F9258A4@holtmann.org> In-Reply-To: <643C6020-2FC5-4EEA-8F64-5D4B7F9258A4@holtmann.org> From: Alain Michaud Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2020 15:32:14 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] Bluetooth: btusb: Indicate Microsoft vendor extension for Intel 9460/9560 and 9160/9260 To: Marcel Holtmann Cc: Joe Perches , Miao-chen Chou , Bluetooth Kernel Mailing List , Luiz Augusto von Dentz , Alain Michaud , "David S. Miller" , Jakub Kicinski , Johan Hedberg , LKML , netdev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 2:35 PM Marcel Holtmann wrote: > > Hi Alain, > > >>>>>> This adds a bit mask of driver_info for Microsoft vendor extension and > >>>>>> indicates the support for Intel 9460/9560 and 9160/9260. See > >>>>>> https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/bluetooth/ > >>>>>> microsoft-defined-bluetooth-hci-commands-and-events for more information > >>>>>> about the extension. This was verified with Intel ThunderPeak BT controller > >>>>>> where msft_vnd_ext_opcode is 0xFC1E. > >>>> [] > >>>>>> diff --git a/include/net/bluetooth/hci_core.h b/include/net/bluetooth/hci_core.h > >>>> [] > >>>>>> @@ -315,6 +315,10 @@ struct hci_dev { > >>>>>> __u8 ssp_debug_mode; > >>>>>> __u8 hw_error_code; > >>>>>> __u32 clock; > >>>>>> + __u16 msft_vnd_ext_opcode; > >>>>>> + __u64 msft_vnd_ext_features; > >>>>>> + __u8 msft_vnd_ext_evt_prefix_len; > >>>>>> + void *msft_vnd_ext_evt_prefix; > >>>> > >>>> msft is just another vendor. > >>>> > >>>> If there are to be vendor extensions, this should > >>>> likely use a blank line above and below and not > >>>> be prefixed with msft_ > >>> > >>> there are other vendors, but all of them are different. So this needs to be prefixed with msft_ actually. But I agree that having empty lines above and below makes it more readable. > >> > >> So struct hci_dev should become a clutter > >> of random vendor extensions? > >> > >> Perhaps there should instead be something like > >> an array of char at the end of the struct and > >> various vendor specific extensions could be > >> overlaid on that array or just add a void * > >> to whatever info that vendors require. > > I don't particularly like trailing buffers, but I agree we could > > possibly organize this a little better by with a struct. something > > like: > > > > struct msft_vnd_ext { > > bool supported; // <-- Clearly calls out if the > > extension is supported. > > __u16 msft_vnd_ext_opcode; // <-- Note that this also > > needs to be provided by the driver. I don't recommend we have this > > read from the hardware since we just cause an extra redirection that > > isn't necessary. Ideally, this should come from the usb_table const. > > Actually supported == false is the same as opcode == 0x0000. And supported == true is opcode != 0x0000. I was thinking of a more generic way to check if the extension is supported so the higher level doesn't need to understand that opcode==0 means it's not supported. For the android extension for example, this would be a simple boolean (there isn't any opcodes). > > > __u64 msft_vnd_ext_features; > > __u8 msft_vnd_ext_evt_prefix_len; > > void *msft_vnd_ext_evt_prefix; > > }; > > > > And then simply add the struct msft_vnd_ext (and any others) to hci_dev. > > Anyway, Lets keep these for now as hci_dev->msft_vnd_ext_*. We can fix this up later without any impact. I agree, this doesn't have a whole lot of long term consequences, although some will want to cherry-pick this to older kernels so if there is something we can do now, it will reduce burden on some products. > > Regards > > Marcel >