Matthias Drochner wrote:
> [ubt]
> plunky@rya-online.net said:
> 
>>This means then, that as-is**, it should really match against device
>>class (as attached)? 
> 
> I'd say so. While the USB class code table says that the Bluetooth
> cladd _may_ refer to devices rather than interfaces, the bluetooth
> spec is quite clear that the device header is supposed to contain
> the class information.
> 
> I'll test your patch later today.

The patch works fine.

-- 
Stephen