netdev - Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] Bluetooth: btusb: Indicate Microsoft vendor extension for Intel 9460/9560 and 9160/9260

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <421d27670f2736c88e8c0693e3ff7c0dcfceb40b.camel@perches.com>
Date:   Mon, 23 Mar 2020 11:45:06 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
        Miao-chen Chou <mcchou@...omium.org>
Cc:     Bluetooth Kernel Mailing List <linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org>,
        Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.von.dentz@...el.com>,
        Alain Michaud <alainm@...omium.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] Bluetooth: btusb: Indicate Microsoft vendor
 extension for Intel 9460/9560 and 9160/9260

On Mon, 2020-03-23 at 18:56 +0100, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> Hi Miao-chen,
> 
> > 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_