From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E81CC49ED7 for ; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 09:11:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1DC4207E0 for ; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 09:11:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kemnade.info header.i=@kemnade.info header.b="DUFNCnoF" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2393342AbfITJLm (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Sep 2019 05:11:42 -0400 Received: from mail.andi.de1.cc ([85.214.55.253]:56078 "EHLO mail.andi.de1.cc" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2393258AbfITJLm (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Sep 2019 05:11:42 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kemnade.info; s=20180802; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help: List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=HELD1wBCSgloEXPlRNWMELq87zwane+TqAg9m+mb8VA=; b=DUFNCnoFznFomFaS/hxKJnsYUA wJqr4aabO8I4BAY7TJ5NZyJ2spYa926AEdPvYI7Oe+amfZUKJqI7bLqCLYMyDU9onPPNU28vM6wGq llcBfDyzDvyxIyb8NqYFyQ7UcvQvlhb347nG2va0qnW01YfqWNbwaB6HG68enjMCSf+E=; Received: from p200300ccff0d4e001a3da2fffebfd33a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([2003:cc:ff0d:4e00:1a3d:a2ff:febf:d33a] helo=aktux) by mail.andi.de1.cc with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iBEx1-00087g-Fl; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 11:11:39 +0200 Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 11:11:38 +0200 From: Andreas Kemnade To: Marcel Holtmann Cc: Carey Sonsino , Johan Hedberg , Jamie Mccrae , "linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] bluetooth: update default BLE connection params Message-ID: <20190920111138.047dc5be@aktux> In-Reply-To: <4BFC2A23-1D8A-4021-BB74-418A13676E65@holtmann.org> References: <705dbccb-58a9-7adc-8430-c16b395c27e5@gmail.com> <4BFC2A23-1D8A-4021-BB74-418A13676E65@holtmann.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.3 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Thu, 5 Sep 2019 17:34:03 +0200 Marcel Holtmann wrote: > Hi Carey, > > > Update the default BLE connection parameters. > > > > Commit c49a8682fc5d298d44e8d911f4fa14690ea9485e introduced a bounds > > check on connection interval update requests, but the default min/max > > values were left at 24-40 (30-50ms) which caused problems for devices > > that want to negotiate connection intervals outside of those bounds. > > > > Setting the default min/max connection interval to the full allowable > > range in the bluetooth specification restores the default Linux behavior > > of allowing remote devices to negotiate their desired connection > > interval, while still permitting the system administrator to later > > narrow the range. > > > > The default supervision timeout must also be modified to accommodate > > the max connection interval increase. The new default value meets the > > requirements of the bluetooth specification and the conditions in > > the hci_check_conn_params function. > > > > The downside to modifying the default supervision timeout is that > > it will take longer (about 10 seconds) to detect a link loss condition. > > > > Fixes c49a8682fc5d: (validate BLE connection interval updates) > > I decided to revert c49a8682fc5d and we need an overall better solution for handling connection parameters. > is this revert also going towards stable/longterm? I do not see it in stable-queue yet. Regards, Andreas