Re: [PATCH 3/3] HID: sensor-hub: don't limit the driver only to USB bus

[Alexander Holler <holler@ahsoftware.de>]

Am 18.02.2013 12:54, schrieb Mika Westerberg:
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 12:37:52PM +0100, Alexander Holler wrote:
>> Am 18.02.2013 12:33, schrieb Mika Westerberg:
>>> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 12:22:58PM +0100, Alexander Holler wrote:
>>>> Am 18.02.2013 12:12, schrieb Mika Westerberg:
>>>>> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 12:03:04PM +0100, Alexander Holler wrote:
>>>>>> Am 11.02.2013 11:31, schrieb Mika Westerberg:
>>>>>>> We now have two transport mediums: USB and I2C, where sensor hubs can
>>>>>>> exists. So instead of constraining the driver to only these two we let it
>>>>>>> to match any HID bus as long as the group is HID_GROUP_SENSOR_HUB.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>   drivers/hid/hid-sensor-hub.c |    3 ++-
>>>>>>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-sensor-hub.c b/drivers/hid/hid-sensor-hub.c
>>>>>>> index 2643bce9..c01f10d 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/hid/hid-sensor-hub.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-sensor-hub.c
>>>>>>> @@ -603,7 +603,8 @@ static void sensor_hub_remove(struct hid_device *hdev)
>>>>>>>   }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   static const struct hid_device_id sensor_hub_devices[] = {
>>>>>>> -	{ HID_DEVICE(BUS_USB, HID_GROUP_SENSOR_HUB, HID_ANY_ID, HID_ANY_ID) },
>>>>>>> +	{ HID_DEVICE(HID_BUS_ANY, HID_GROUP_SENSOR_HUB, HID_ANY_ID,
>>>>>>> +		     HID_ANY_ID) },
>>>>>>>   	{ }
>>>>>>>   };
>>>>>>>   MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(hid, sensor_hub_devices);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hmm, what happens with Bluetooth sensor-hubs? Is the driver now able
>>>>>> to handle them too?
>>>>>
>>>>> It should, yes.
>>>>
>>>> If so, I think patch 1/3 should be modified accordingly.
>>>
>>> Do you know if such devices exists currently? If not, I'm not sure if it
>>> makes sense to do that now.
>>
>> The CC2541DK-SENSOR from TI looks like one. But I'm not sure as I
>> don't have one. Besides that, I think Bluetooth (especially with
>> BT4LE) will be by far the most used bus for sensors hubs.
>
> OK, thanks.
>
> In that case I think it's best to remove the explicit bus check from the
> condition completely and rely on the fact that page == HID_UP_SENSOR.
>
> Since Jiri already applied this patch, I can make an incremental patch
> which removes the explicit bus check, if there are no objections.
>

I just had a deeper look at the spec for that TI device. Looks like the 
default firmware uses GATT and not HID. But nevertheless, if the driver 
does support Bluetooth too, I think enabling it makes sense.

Regards,

Alexander