Re: btuart and SOCKET Bluetooth CF

[Iain Hibbert <plunky%rya-online.net@localhost>]

On Wed, 20 Jan 2010, KIYOHARA Takashi wrote:

> In my opinion, I think that NOKIA DTL is subspecies of btuart(H4). This
> header is only a little different.  Therefore, I feel that it is strange
> to prepare a line discipline new different for NOKIA DTL.

The handling of the data is completely different though - with the
BTUART protocol we must follow the contents of the packet intricately
because we have no way of knowing how big the packet is unless we watch it
pass (the header is different per packet type)

with the DTL it is much simpler - we don't care about the packet contents
at this level because we can always know the length of the packet. All the
7 states are not needed, as 2 only are sufficient (header & data)

These drivers are only a line filter and it makes no sense to me to start
a wrong filter then apply a correction when we could just start the
correct one in the beginning. There is a little autoconf glue the same it
is true, but the thing which is different (the IO routines) are the
majority of the driver..

iain