Jean Tourrilhes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > OK, I've looked through your patch, and I have applied some of it. But I
> > decided to do things a bit different:
> >
> > o I see no reason to support Ultra PID's with extension bytes. There will
> > _never_ be any use for it! IrDA have reserved all pid's and they have only
> > specified one (0x01 for Ultra). This mechanism is the same as for hint
> > bytes, and nobody supports more than 2 hint bytes!!! Therefore I have
> > choosen not to use your irda_ultra_bind() function.
>
> With all due respect, this is really a stupid decision. This
> functionality was working (as opposed to your patches) and was
> conformant to the spec, and there is absolutely no reason to remove
> it. You limit the number of protocols on top of Ultra to 127, which is
> not much (we don't have dynamic allocation here). If I follow your
> reasoning, let's remove Ultra because nobody will _never_ use it.
Have you actually read your own answer? You are telling me that 127
simultanous connections on top of Ultra is not enough! I remember once
I had 7 "normal" connections at the same time ;-)
Ultra _will_ be used since you can already find it in a couple of mobile
phones which supports OBEX over Ultra. OBEX over Ultra uses PID 0x01, so
that give you 126 other PID's to play with. Nobody else are using them ;-)
If you need more for some special experiment, then why don't you multiplex
on top of one Ultra connection (or use your own patch)?
BTW. I really cannot see that limiting the number of PID bytes to 4 is more
conformant to the spec than limiting it to 1 byte.
> > o No support for connectionless LSAPs with selectors other than 0x70. The
> > spec says this is the _only_ connless LSAP, and that we should drop all
> > frames containing higher selectors. If we have support for this, the we
> > might fail a compliance test, so again this will not go into the main
> > distribution.
>
> I just hope you didn't hardcoded 0x70 all over the place. My
> code was careful to strike a balance between compliance to the spec
> and future extensibility.
Yes I did ;-) In section 3.2.2 (page 21) in IrLMP they say:
"All Data LM-PDUs delivered via IrLAP_Unitdata.indication primitived (UI
frames sent outside an IrLAP connection) except for those addressed between
Connectionless LSAPs (DLSAP-SEL=SLAP-SEL=0x70) are discarded."
Now why did they use the PID header if they planned to allow
for more connectionless LSAP's? You wanted almost 4M "connections" over one
SAP yourself!!! So now you want even more "connections"?
> > Hope you don't get really mad at me, but I think this is the best to
> > do. This will give us a good Ultra functionality and an impl. which is easy
> > to debug (and that is usually my job ;-)
>
> Currently, I feel that's it's me doing most of the debugging
> and correcting your mistakes in the code.
Sorry for giving you the Ultra patch in the first place! I told you this
was work in progress! You said your were interested in Ultra, so I made a
patch out of my code. Silly me! Why don't you make your own patches it you
don't like mine. When you make patches for my patches, then you should
accept it if I choose to do things differently.
> > If you feel I'm destroying
> > everything, then please tell me since I really want you to continue
> > torturing and extending the Linux-IrDA stack. You're doing a really great
> > job!!
>
> Try to read a bit more carefully patches, comments and so on,
Did that with the actisys dongle patch didn't I?
BTW: I'm having problems with the auto-connect patch because it has
problems when you put 2 or more IrDA devices in front of your machine
(suddenly you don't care about making things so general after all). This is
a policy decision which should be made in user-space and the user must
probably be involved as well (as Win98 deals with it). That this hasn't
been properly impl. in user-space yet in Linux, is not an argument for
moving it into the kernel.
-- Dag
--
/ Dag Brattli | The Linux-IrDA Project /
// University of Tromsoe, Norway | Infrared communication for Linux //
/// http://www.cs.uit.no/~dagb | http://www.cs.uit.no/linux-irda/ ///
_______________________________________________
Linux-IrDA mailing list - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www4.pasta.cs.UiT.No/mailman/listinfo/linux-irda
