Skip to contentSkip to conversation

add new device for fixed bug 60901

PATCH In review Volkov Aleksey 2 participants 2 messages May 3, 2015 Bluetooth drivers

lore
Share & tools
lore

Volkov Aleksey

author
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 add new device for fixed bug 60901

That patch fix bug https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60901 for my Roper Class 1 dongle

Signed-off-by Aleksei Volkov <[email protected]>
---
 drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c | 1+
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 0 deletion(-)
drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c renamed from drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c.orig +1 -0
diff -up linux-4.0.0-gentoo/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c.orig linux-4.0.0-gentoo/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c 
@@ -254,6 +254,7 @@ static const struct usb_device_id blackl
 
 	/* Roper Class 1 Bluetooth Dongle (Silicon Wave based) */
 	{ USB_DEVICE(0x1300, 0x0001), .driver_info = BTUSB_SWAVE },
+	{ USB_DEVICE(0x1310, 0x0001), .driver_info = BTUSB_SWAVE },
 
 	/* Digianswer devices */
 	{ USB_DEVICE(0x08fd, 0x0001), .driver_info = BTUSB_DIGIANSWER },
maintainer
#1 lore raw

Hi Aleksei,

the subject line needs to read "[PATCH] Bluetooth: btusb: " as prefix so we can clearly identify where this belong to. Also stating a random bug number in the subject is useless, refer to the device in question.

Quoted 1 line

That patch fix bug https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60901 for my Roper Class 1 dongle

You need to include the output of /sys/kernel/debug/usb/devices for this specific device in the commit message. I also prefer that instead of just referring to a bug number, you explain why this patch is needed. For example output of hcidump or btmon showing the problem here.

drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c static const struct usb_device_id blackl · line 257

Quoted 13 lines
Signed-off-by Aleksei Volkov <[email protected]>

---
drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c | 1+

1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 0 deletion(-)

diff -up linux-4.0.0-gentoo/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c.orig linux-4.0.0-gentoo/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c

drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c renamed from drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c.orig +1 -0
@@ -254,6 +254,7 @@ static const struct usb_device_id blackl
 
 	/* Roper Class 1 Bluetooth Dongle (Silicon Wave based) */
 	{ USB_DEVICE(0x1300, 0x0001), .driver_info = BTUSB_SWAVE },
+	{ USB_DEVICE(0x1310, 0x0001), .driver_info = BTUSB_SWAVE },

Did I wrong used 0x1300 originally and meant actually 0x1310 or does Roper really have two USB Vendor IDs this close to each other?

drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c static const struct usb_device_id blackl · line 260

Quoted 2 lines
drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c renamed from drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c.orig +0 -0
 	/* Digianswer devices */
 	{ USB_DEVICE(0x08fd, 0x0001), .driver_info = BTUSB_DIGIANSWER },

Regards

Marcel