Hi Claudio,
On 03/04/2013 10:02 AM, Claudio Takahasi wrote:
Hi Denis:
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Denis Kenzior<[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Claudio,
On 02/28/2013 12:52 PM, Claudio Takahasi wrote:
This patch adds a new function to read the local supported Handsfree
Profile version.
---
include/handsfree-audio.h | 1 +
src/handsfree-audio.c | 5 +++++
2 files changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/include/handsfree-audio.h b/include/handsfree-audio.h
index c5403c7..96597c2 100644
--- a/include/handsfree-audio.h
+++ b/include/handsfree-audio.h
@@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ struct ofono_handsfree_card
*ofono_handsfree_card_create(const char *remote,
const char
*local);
int ofono_handsfree_card_register(struct ofono_handsfree_card *card);
void ofono_handsfree_card_remove(struct ofono_handsfree_card *card);
+enum hfp_version ofono_handsfree_get_version();
I'd like to avoid such details in the card functionality.
Are our possible scenarios the following?
1. SCO defer in kernel, CVSD mSBC supported
yes.
2. SCO defer not in kernel, CVSD mSBC supported
not possible. Wide band speech requires defer setup to set the SCO
parameters properly.
3. SCO defer in kernel, CVSD supported
yes.
4. SCO defer not in kernel, CVSD supported
yes.
If so, can we always advertise HFP 1.6, but only declare support for CVSD in
case 2?
I am not a spec (or qualification) expert, but I will try to expose
my understanding of the docs:
For case 2, my understanding is: if HF supports *only* CVSD
(mandatory), it doesn't make sense to inform that codec negotiation is
supported. HFP 1.5 (or older) shall not indicate that it supports
codec negotiation (during service level connection negotiation) and it
should not set the wide band speech support in the service record.
There are other features of 1.6 though that might be useful. For
example, BTRH status is properly shown in CLCC, and a few other
niceties. I see no reason to fall back to 1.5 just because we do not
support wide-band speech.
Either way, the version decision is not up to the card, it is up to the
plugin. The function to get the version information needs to be dropped.
One thing that I can't answer is if it is allowed to inform in the
service record that the HF supports HFP 1.6 (version), but don't set
the wide band speech feature in record.
I don't see why not. Both Codec Negotiation and Wide-band speech are
labeled optional for HF/AG in Table 3.1. The only note there says: "If
Wide Band Speech is supported, Codec Negotiation shall also be
supported." However, there is no note vice-versa. So my interpretation
is that Codec Negotiation can always be supported. Can we check the
test spec?
The problem I see is that by the time we register the SDP record, we
still do not know for sure whether the audio framework truly supports mSBC.
Regards,
-Denis
_______________________________________________
ofono mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ofono.org/listinfo/ofono
