Re: btuart and SOCKET Bluetooth CF

[KIYOHARA Takashi <kiyohara%kk.iij4u.or.jp@localhost>]

Hi! Iain,


From: Iain Hibbert <plunky%rya-online.net@localhost>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 11:53:50 +0000 (GMT)

> On Thu, 18 Feb 2010, KIYOHARA Takashi wrote:

> > > +static int
> > > +btuart_dtl_probe(dev_t dev)
> > > +{
> > > +#if NCOM > 0
> >    :
> > > +#endif
> > > + return 0;
> > > +}
> > >
> > > I really dislike this function, it depends on internals of com driver [btw
> > > COMUNIT(x) would be (minor(x) & COMUNIT_MASK)] and pcmcia and using this
> > > method prevents a soft emulator and/or needs kernel modifications to
> > > handle any new device.
> >
> > We are expecting the minor number to be obtained.  In my opinion, it is
> > necessary to open() the device node for that.  Therefore, only minor()
> > is called.  It thinks dependence on the structure of pcmcia(4) for other
> > way not to exist though it is very regrettable.  ;-<
> 
> I don't understand why you want to make it complex in this way?
> 
> in the beginning, the admin must recognise that they have a Nokia DTL
> device, eg:
> 
> # btattach dtl /dev/tty03 19200
> 
> btattach will perform the device specific initialisation, and set the line
> to use the protocol that is required.  Why do you desire to forget this
> knowledge of the protocol type and require the btuart.c to depend on
> possibly unrelated parts of the kernel to re-discover it later?

hmm..
I do not like to make new line disc for LSI named NOKIA DTL.


> I find it makes no sense to do it that way, and furthermore the method
> will cause problems for any user who wishes to use the Nokia DTL protocol
> in a way that is not previously defined by you.

To begin with, what is the NOKIA DTL protocol?
NOKIA DTL is LSI.
We might separately make btdtl.c.
# However, I will not make it...

Thanks,
--
kiyohara