From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=91.216.248.212 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1793810847; b=eVZ5/K5Dx5azRCrcwsMCcMvKdm4OHW6pPJZtnW9ItADmvgmo2UErxXp9TBrgtPzweap9 XhVn88qU05sn85jRgnuV9D/Uk5itrfZFIvgBhus6ZtnHo3Oo5797Y0IxMCyROoyoKDB/Q Z9AEnXy9/hwSi6hhMFpDJMVsp2MO2+bwjC61pGr6Rimmnfk5YLK1CC850LAhY56eNFcFK mKWpp+tvDFKeJh43jtIiFyogDWo1a6RjV/6PDOK1koiwTBgQckmAlmvwdetJyrccpWsAR K4dFWIx9IOMUoeEPAvqzI4PEUoZDl9HHs1ty6LUIr+i6iZMluknONtF/6w3LsmSBUbQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1793810847; h=DMARC-Filter:Date:X-Lima-ML-UUID:DKIM-Signature:From:To:Cc:Subject: Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:Organization:X-Mailer:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=+Mmd9iz+6l+RtzunqHn07DyKAk1sZGUOJe891sWi+Nc=; b=qcmKmSTLOtGX79MWfGo6sfwT0tq9KBJQyPkd1Fh/MbdTueLM6BzqJA9YHR19YQoWpLRV K0sV6jlsDjjqGaoXd7y6VJxGlVsoSZw+KukfvgVFcjlr4foWoq3oBYd5c+iAfAULpmD/l cxifiInjvgFc5KCC13fkHr02FzaEjhjO+AlP1xLD3Wm1FQPOB1QGtkO+rZxyp0fCIO9at ML0LVcoDT9bCLRc/5RU9fMX+6bUbEnzFMB0ACJUPWMaHRy+RlTWxrpUVaf/ZFTthQ+R4n rGC0F2eQ5MADK3FbDM6XKRMBk9/USCkX/A6v6si+3eIwfAJSZlU/nyWTnjaud7OMegw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none header.from=deq.rocks; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=deq.rocks; dkim=pass header.d=deq.rocks header.i=@deq.rocks header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=securedbylima-20251205 header.b=uCkjDFcp; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=91.216.248.212 Received: from bulk0.mail-out.lima-city.de (bulk0.mail-out.lima-city.de [91.216.248.212]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6FBA606A32E; Wed, 4 Nov 2026 16:47:25 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp.subspace.kernel.org E6FBA606A32E Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=deq.rocks Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=deq.rocks Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=deq.rocks header.i=@deq.rocks header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=securedbylima-20251205 header.b=uCkjDFcp Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2026 17:47:20 +0100 X-Lima-ML-UUID: 1fb7ae95-0ae2-4b9e-9cfd-6a995782d75f DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=deq.rocks; s=securedbylima-20251205; t=1793810843; bh=+Mmd9iz+6l+RtzunqHn07DyKAk1sZGUOJe891sWi+Nc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=uCkjDFcpV18IotsW2/mO8QwbUqz2kruKoz/mzn/mqm97aaG+9qIqQQTJxN136PzNd 1yLb/GTpobe0/76DBqk9c81b54TwUdcjye6wpIC1xwGCI/PdFT+W8fI91tr51/YV2Q PDFyzzOvVF1PwGBr8m0eK8n9X3XuRxtIX6T1/ayXRqZ0ZFNIUCw3hh9sumtnWCeC9w TmGfmORbv2YghVWGV8jV2SQ4FMN3DDwFIslRU2jhBYYkVLKi0KUEuqqkfg55xVjUcl T/MQzMKJPsPBMDNbM2oFTn0QfyBYfjRAxOdj0IzHaPxbRU/wVWoMBbcaKllNCyqKwk iXxxy/T5aREFQ== From: =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcsOp?= Eikmeyer To: Luiz Augusto von Dentz Cc: marcel@holtmann.org, linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sven@kernel.org, j@jannau.net, neal@gompa.dev, asahi@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, 66ton99@gmail.com, josemiguelo.ochoa@gmail.com, aditya.garg@linux.dev, Yossef Osman Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] Bluetooth: btbcm: clear vendor bits in LE advertising report types Message-ID: <20261104174720.254b7e00@kait2en-mbp15-1> In-Reply-To: References: <20261104151601.70493-1-dev@deq.rocks> <20261104151601.70493-3-dev@deq.rocks> <20261104164647.5e9351cb@kait2en-mbp15-1> Organization: KaiT2en X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.4.0 (GTK 3.24.52; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 4 Nov 2026 11:29:11 -0500 Luiz Augusto von Dentz wrote: > Yes that would work. That said, I don't think it is worth adding a > quirk for this. Masking the reserved bits shouldn't cause any side > effects afaik, well except if those bits are later adopted by > Bluetooth SIG. Then these controllers would become > non-compliant=E2=80=94though they already are, as the bits are reserved a= nd > not in use. In that case we would probably require a quirk to avoid a > conflict. So, is that what you are trying to fix? No, nothing concrete beyond the scope, and I agree it is harmless as long as the bits stay reserved. We only put it in the drivers because our downstream ships driver modules through DKMS and not bluetooth.ko, which let many users test it quickly. Let's keep 88397423671f as it is then. I'll drop patch 2 and 3 and send a v2 with patch 1 and 4.