Query reagrding the MAS Instance Information Support patchset

Query reagrding the MAS Instance Information Support patchset

[Gowtham Anandha Babu]

Hi Luiz,

I have submitted a patch set to add support for MAP MAS Instance feature on
the month of October. Below are the links.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bluez.kernel/54106
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bluez.kernel/53974
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bluez.kernel/53975
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bluez.kernel/53976
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bluez.kernel/53977
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bluez.kernel/54110
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bluez.kernel/53979

But the suggestion provided was to wait until the Multiple MAS Instance
support.
Why can't we implement the multiple MAS Instance support on top of this?
Some fixes and cleanups are needed in the above submitted patches. I will
fix that.
Shall I resend the same?
What do you think?

Regards,
Gowtham Anandha Babu

Re: Query reagrding the MAS Instance Information Support patchset

[Luiz Augusto von Dentz]

Hi Gowtham,

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Gowtham Anandha Babu
<gowtham.ab@samsung.com> wrote:
> Hi Luiz,
>
> I have submitted a patch set to add support for MAP MAS Instance feature on
> the month of October. Below are the links.
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bluez.kernel/54106
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bluez.kernel/53974
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bluez.kernel/53975
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bluez.kernel/53976
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bluez.kernel/53977
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bluez.kernel/54110
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bluez.kernel/53979
>
> But the suggestion provided was to wait until the Multiple MAS Instance
> support.
> Why can't we implement the multiple MAS Instance support on top of this?
> Some fixes and cleanups are needed in the above submitted patches. I will
> fix that.
> Shall I resend the same?
> What do you think?

I still have plans to implement the folder structure as I mentioned,
this would basically mean no API changes are needed, this would
conflict with your changes. I have been some patches for this already
which should be ready for submission next week.


-- 
Luiz Augusto von Dentz