[v9,1/5] Bluetooth: btusb: disable Intel link statistics telemetry events

Commit Message

Joseph Hwang Aug. 15, 2021, 12:17 p.m. UTC

To avoid the overhead on both the controller and the host, the
Intel link statistics telemetry events are disabled by default.

Reviewed-by: Miao-chen Chou <[e-mail]>
Signed-off-by: Chethan T N <[e-mail]>
Signed-off-by: Kiran K <[e-mail]>
Signed-off-by: Joseph Hwang <[e-mail]>
---

Changes in v9:
- This version fixes the compile errors of patch 3/5.

Changes in v8:
- This version adds a new patch which refactors the set_exp_feature
  function with a feature table.
- Swap the patches per the comments on v7.
- Remove the unsuitable debug messages.
- This patch is not changed in this version.

Changes in v7:
- Rebase on Tedd's patches that moved functionality from btusb to
  btintel.

Changes in v6:
- Rebase on the latest commit.

Changes in v5:
- Rebase this patch 1/4 to resolve conflicts.
- There are changes in patches 3/4 and 4/4.

Changes in v4:
- The original 2 patches in Series-version 3 are split into
  2 patches from each patch per reviewers' comments. There are
  A total of 4 patches in this series now.
- The callback function is renamed from hdev->set_vs_dbg_evt to
  hdev->set_quality_report. Note that there are two different
  specifications which will be integrated soon and enabled/disabled
  with the same callback. One is Android Bluetooth Quality Report
  (BQR), and the other Intel link statistics telemetry events here.
  While most Bluetooth controller vendors have supported or are
  supporting the Android specification in their controllers, it looks
  making sense to use set_quality_report as the callback name.
- Similarly, the config option BT_FEATURE_VS_DBG_EVT is renamed as
  BT_FEATURE_QUALITY_REPORT which depends on BT now.
- The BQR is controller specific. There needs to be a valid hdev in the
  first place. This is fixed in set_exp_feature().
- In set_exp_feature(), bluez will only set experimental feature to set
  BQR when the feature is supported. Please refer to bluez CLs.
- Also refer to bluez patches for the decoding support of btmon.

Changes in v3:
- fix the long line in the commit message

Changes in v2:
- take care of intel_newgen as well as intel_new
- fix the long lines in mgmt.c

 drivers/bluetooth/btintel.c | 20 --------------------
 1 file changed, 20 deletions(-)

Comments

[e-mail] Aug. 15, 2021, 1:23 p.m. UTC | #1

This is automated email and please do not reply to this email!

Dear submitter,

Thank you for submitting the patches to the linux bluetooth mailing list.
This is a CI test results with your patch series:
PW Link:https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bluetooth/list/?series=531683

---Test result---

Test Summary:
CheckPatch                    PASS      2.92 seconds
GitLint                       PASS      0.61 seconds
BuildKernel                   PASS      598.41 seconds
TestRunner: Setup             PASS      394.12 seconds
TestRunner: l2cap-tester      PASS      2.89 seconds
TestRunner: bnep-tester       PASS      2.07 seconds
TestRunner: mgmt-tester       FAIL      30.94 seconds
TestRunner: rfcomm-tester     PASS      2.31 seconds
TestRunner: sco-tester        PASS      2.20 seconds
TestRunner: smp-tester        FAIL      2.27 seconds
TestRunner: userchan-tester   PASS      2.09 seconds

Details
##############################
Test: CheckPatch - PASS - 2.92 seconds
Run checkpatch.pl script with rule in .checkpatch.conf


##############################
Test: GitLint - PASS - 0.61 seconds
Run gitlint with rule in .gitlint


##############################
Test: BuildKernel - PASS - 598.41 seconds
Build Kernel with minimal configuration supports Bluetooth


##############################
Test: TestRunner: Setup - PASS - 394.12 seconds
Setup environment for running Test Runner


##############################
Test: TestRunner: l2cap-tester - PASS - 2.89 seconds
Run test-runner with l2cap-tester
Total: 40, Passed: 40 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0

##############################
Test: TestRunner: bnep-tester - PASS - 2.07 seconds
Run test-runner with bnep-tester
Total: 1, Passed: 1 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0

##############################
Test: TestRunner: mgmt-tester - FAIL - 30.94 seconds
Run test-runner with mgmt-tester
Total: 448, Passed: 444 (99.1%), Failed: 1, Not Run: 3

Failed Test Cases
Read Exp Feature - Success                           Failed       0.012 seconds

##############################
Test: TestRunner: rfcomm-tester - PASS - 2.31 seconds
Run test-runner with rfcomm-tester
Total: 9, Passed: 9 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0

##############################
Test: TestRunner: sco-tester - PASS - 2.20 seconds
Run test-runner with sco-tester
Total: 8, Passed: 8 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0

##############################
Test: TestRunner: smp-tester - FAIL - 2.27 seconds
Run test-runner with smp-tester
Total: 8, Passed: 7 (87.5%), Failed: 1, Not Run: 0

Failed Test Cases
SMP Client - SC Request 2                            Failed       0.024 seconds

##############################
Test: TestRunner: userchan-tester - PASS - 2.09 seconds
Run test-runner with userchan-tester
Total: 3, Passed: 3 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0



---
Regards,
Linux Bluetooth

Luiz Augusto von Dentz Aug. 16, 2021, 5:49 p.m. UTC | #2

Hi Joseph,

On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 6:25 AM <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> This is automated email and please do not reply to this email!
>
> Dear submitter,
>
> Thank you for submitting the patches to the linux bluetooth mailing list.
> This is a CI test results with your patch series:
> PW Link:https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bluetooth/list/?series=531683
>
> ---Test result---
>
> Test Summary:
> CheckPatch                    PASS      2.92 seconds
> GitLint                       PASS      0.61 seconds
> BuildKernel                   PASS      598.41 seconds
> TestRunner: Setup             PASS      394.12 seconds
> TestRunner: l2cap-tester      PASS      2.89 seconds
> TestRunner: bnep-tester       PASS      2.07 seconds
> TestRunner: mgmt-tester       FAIL      30.94 seconds
> TestRunner: rfcomm-tester     PASS      2.31 seconds
> TestRunner: sco-tester        PASS      2.20 seconds
> TestRunner: smp-tester        FAIL      2.27 seconds
> TestRunner: userchan-tester   PASS      2.09 seconds
>
> Details
> ##############################
> Test: CheckPatch - PASS - 2.92 seconds
> Run checkpatch.pl script with rule in .checkpatch.conf
>
>
> ##############################
> Test: GitLint - PASS - 0.61 seconds
> Run gitlint with rule in .gitlint
>
>
> ##############################
> Test: BuildKernel - PASS - 598.41 seconds
> Build Kernel with minimal configuration supports Bluetooth
>
>
> ##############################
> Test: TestRunner: Setup - PASS - 394.12 seconds
> Setup environment for running Test Runner
>
>
> ##############################
> Test: TestRunner: l2cap-tester - PASS - 2.89 seconds
> Run test-runner with l2cap-tester
> Total: 40, Passed: 40 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
>
> ##############################
> Test: TestRunner: bnep-tester - PASS - 2.07 seconds
> Run test-runner with bnep-tester
> Total: 1, Passed: 1 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
>
> ##############################
> Test: TestRunner: mgmt-tester - FAIL - 30.94 seconds
> Run test-runner with mgmt-tester
> Total: 448, Passed: 444 (99.1%), Failed: 1, Not Run: 3
>
> Failed Test Cases
> Read Exp Feature - Success                           Failed       0.012 seconds

Looks like there is a regression on mgmt-tester:

Read Exp Feature - Success - run
  Sending Read Experimental Features Information (0x0049)
  Test condition added, total 1
  Read Experimental Features Information (0x0049): Success (0x00)
  Invalid cmd response parameter size
Read Exp Feature - Success - test failed

>
> ##############################
> Test: TestRunner: rfcomm-tester - PASS - 2.31 seconds
> Run test-runner with rfcomm-tester
> Total: 9, Passed: 9 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
>
> ##############################
> Test: TestRunner: sco-tester - PASS - 2.20 seconds
> Run test-runner with sco-tester
> Total: 8, Passed: 8 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
>
> ##############################
> Test: TestRunner: smp-tester - FAIL - 2.27 seconds
> Run test-runner with smp-tester
> Total: 8, Passed: 7 (87.5%), Failed: 1, Not Run: 0
>
> Failed Test Cases
> SMP Client - SC Request 2                            Failed       0.024 seconds
>
> ##############################
> Test: TestRunner: userchan-tester - PASS - 2.09 seconds
> Run test-runner with userchan-tester
> Total: 3, Passed: 3 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
>
>
>
> ---
> Regards,
> Linux Bluetooth
>

Joseph Hwang Aug. 17, 2021, 9:54 a.m. UTC | #3

(Resent this email to contain only plaintext.)

Hi Luiz:

  It seems that mgmt-tester currently uses a fixed feature count.
Every time a new exp feature is added, the mgmt-tester would  be
broken. By checking the kernel, it seems that there are currently 2 or
3 exp features, i.e., debug uuid, simultaneous central peripheral
uuid, and LL privacy uuid. Note that the debug exp feature is guarded
by CONFIG_BT_FEATURE_DEBUG. So I am not sure how the kernel is
configured and made on your test setup.

  If we fix the mgmt-tester in bluez to have 3 or 4 (which one?)
features before merging the kernel changes here that adds a new
quality exp feature, it would not match the existing kernel which has
only 2 or 3 features.

  Do you have any preference about how to fix the mgmt-tester?

  My suggestion is to remove the checking of the feature count from
the mgmt-tester. The feature count changes over time. It is possible
to implement a customized exp_feat_check function which can be more
flexible. If a uuid is found in the MGMT response, its associated
flags are checked against.

  The data currently used in the mgmt-tester:

static const uint8_t read_exp_feat_param_success[] = {
0x02, 0x00, /* Feature Count */
0xd6, 0x49, 0xb0, 0xd1, 0x28, 0xeb, /* UUID - Simultaneous */
0x27, 0x92, 0x96, 0x46, 0xc0, 0x42, /* Central Peripheral */
0xb5, 0x10, 0x1b, 0x67,
0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, /* Flags */
0x04, 0x00, 0x13, 0xac, 0x42, 0x02, /* UUID - LL Privacy */
0xde, 0xb3, 0xea, 0x11, 0x73, 0xc2,
0x48, 0xa1, 0xc0, 0x15,
0x02, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, /* Flags */
};


  Please let me know what you think.

Thanks and regards,
Joseph


On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 1:49 AM Luiz Augusto von Dentz
<[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Hi Joseph,
>
> On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 6:25 AM <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > This is automated email and please do not reply to this email!
> >
> > Dear submitter,
> >
> > Thank you for submitting the patches to the linux bluetooth mailing list.
> > This is a CI test results with your patch series:
> > PW Link:https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bluetooth/list/?series=531683
> >
> > ---Test result---
> >
> > Test Summary:
> > CheckPatch                    PASS      2.92 seconds
> > GitLint                       PASS      0.61 seconds
> > BuildKernel                   PASS      598.41 seconds
> > TestRunner: Setup             PASS      394.12 seconds
> > TestRunner: l2cap-tester      PASS      2.89 seconds
> > TestRunner: bnep-tester       PASS      2.07 seconds
> > TestRunner: mgmt-tester       FAIL      30.94 seconds
> > TestRunner: rfcomm-tester     PASS      2.31 seconds
> > TestRunner: sco-tester        PASS      2.20 seconds
> > TestRunner: smp-tester        FAIL      2.27 seconds
> > TestRunner: userchan-tester   PASS      2.09 seconds
> >
> > Details
> > ##############################
> > Test: CheckPatch - PASS - 2.92 seconds
> > Run checkpatch.pl script with rule in .checkpatch.conf
> >
> >
> > ##############################
> > Test: GitLint - PASS - 0.61 seconds
> > Run gitlint with rule in .gitlint
> >
> >
> > ##############################
> > Test: BuildKernel - PASS - 598.41 seconds
> > Build Kernel with minimal configuration supports Bluetooth
> >
> >
> > ##############################
> > Test: TestRunner: Setup - PASS - 394.12 seconds
> > Setup environment for running Test Runner
> >
> >
> > ##############################
> > Test: TestRunner: l2cap-tester - PASS - 2.89 seconds
> > Run test-runner with l2cap-tester
> > Total: 40, Passed: 40 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> >
> > ##############################
> > Test: TestRunner: bnep-tester - PASS - 2.07 seconds
> > Run test-runner with bnep-tester
> > Total: 1, Passed: 1 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> >
> > ##############################
> > Test: TestRunner: mgmt-tester - FAIL - 30.94 seconds
> > Run test-runner with mgmt-tester
> > Total: 448, Passed: 444 (99.1%), Failed: 1, Not Run: 3
> >
> > Failed Test Cases
> > Read Exp Feature - Success                           Failed       0.012 seconds
>
> Looks like there is a regression on mgmt-tester:
>
> Read Exp Feature - Success - run
>   Sending Read Experimental Features Information (0x0049)
>   Test condition added, total 1
>   Read Experimental Features Information (0x0049): Success (0x00)
>   Invalid cmd response parameter size
> Read Exp Feature - Success - test failed
>
> >
> > ##############################
> > Test: TestRunner: rfcomm-tester - PASS - 2.31 seconds
> > Run test-runner with rfcomm-tester
> > Total: 9, Passed: 9 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> >
> > ##############################
> > Test: TestRunner: sco-tester - PASS - 2.20 seconds
> > Run test-runner with sco-tester
> > Total: 8, Passed: 8 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> >
> > ##############################
> > Test: TestRunner: smp-tester - FAIL - 2.27 seconds
> > Run test-runner with smp-tester
> > Total: 8, Passed: 7 (87.5%), Failed: 1, Not Run: 0
> >
> > Failed Test Cases
> > SMP Client - SC Request 2                            Failed       0.024 seconds
> >
> > ##############################
> > Test: TestRunner: userchan-tester - PASS - 2.09 seconds
> > Run test-runner with userchan-tester
> > Total: 3, Passed: 3 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Regards,
> > Linux Bluetooth
> >
>
>
> --
> Luiz Augusto von Dentz

Joseph Hwang Aug. 18, 2021, 5:49 a.m. UTC | #4

Hi Luiz:

  I am wondering if it is possible to merge these kernel patches
before fixing the mgmt-tester?

  The mgmt-tester failed due to its checking against the fixed exp
feature count and the corresponding exp UUIDs and flags. A more
flexible tester may be required so that the tester would not be broken
whenever a new exp feature is added.

Thanks and regards,
Joseph

On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 5:54 PM Joseph Hwang <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> (Resent this email to contain only plaintext.)
>
> Hi Luiz:
>
>   It seems that mgmt-tester currently uses a fixed feature count.
> Every time a new exp feature is added, the mgmt-tester would  be
> broken. By checking the kernel, it seems that there are currently 2 or
> 3 exp features, i.e., debug uuid, simultaneous central peripheral
> uuid, and LL privacy uuid. Note that the debug exp feature is guarded
> by CONFIG_BT_FEATURE_DEBUG. So I am not sure how the kernel is
> configured and made on your test setup.
>
>   If we fix the mgmt-tester in bluez to have 3 or 4 (which one?)
> features before merging the kernel changes here that adds a new
> quality exp feature, it would not match the existing kernel which has
> only 2 or 3 features.
>
>   Do you have any preference about how to fix the mgmt-tester?
>
>   My suggestion is to remove the checking of the feature count from
> the mgmt-tester. The feature count changes over time. It is possible
> to implement a customized exp_feat_check function which can be more
> flexible. If a uuid is found in the MGMT response, its associated
> flags are checked against.
>
>   The data currently used in the mgmt-tester:
>
> static const uint8_t read_exp_feat_param_success[] = {
> 0x02, 0x00, /* Feature Count */
> 0xd6, 0x49, 0xb0, 0xd1, 0x28, 0xeb, /* UUID - Simultaneous */
> 0x27, 0x92, 0x96, 0x46, 0xc0, 0x42, /* Central Peripheral */
> 0xb5, 0x10, 0x1b, 0x67,
> 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, /* Flags */
> 0x04, 0x00, 0x13, 0xac, 0x42, 0x02, /* UUID - LL Privacy */
> 0xde, 0xb3, 0xea, 0x11, 0x73, 0xc2,
> 0x48, 0xa1, 0xc0, 0x15,
> 0x02, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, /* Flags */
> };
>
>
>   Please let me know what you think.
>
> Thanks and regards,
> Joseph
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 1:49 AM Luiz Augusto von Dentz
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Joseph,
> >
> > On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 6:25 AM <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > >
> > > This is automated email and please do not reply to this email!
> > >
> > > Dear submitter,
> > >
> > > Thank you for submitting the patches to the linux bluetooth mailing list.
> > > This is a CI test results with your patch series:
> > > PW Link:https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bluetooth/list/?series=531683
> > >
> > > ---Test result---
> > >
> > > Test Summary:
> > > CheckPatch                    PASS      2.92 seconds
> > > GitLint                       PASS      0.61 seconds
> > > BuildKernel                   PASS      598.41 seconds
> > > TestRunner: Setup             PASS      394.12 seconds
> > > TestRunner: l2cap-tester      PASS      2.89 seconds
> > > TestRunner: bnep-tester       PASS      2.07 seconds
> > > TestRunner: mgmt-tester       FAIL      30.94 seconds
> > > TestRunner: rfcomm-tester     PASS      2.31 seconds
> > > TestRunner: sco-tester        PASS      2.20 seconds
> > > TestRunner: smp-tester        FAIL      2.27 seconds
> > > TestRunner: userchan-tester   PASS      2.09 seconds
> > >
> > > Details
> > > ##############################
> > > Test: CheckPatch - PASS - 2.92 seconds
> > > Run checkpatch.pl script with rule in .checkpatch.conf
> > >
> > >
> > > ##############################
> > > Test: GitLint - PASS - 0.61 seconds
> > > Run gitlint with rule in .gitlint
> > >
> > >
> > > ##############################
> > > Test: BuildKernel - PASS - 598.41 seconds
> > > Build Kernel with minimal configuration supports Bluetooth
> > >
> > >
> > > ##############################
> > > Test: TestRunner: Setup - PASS - 394.12 seconds
> > > Setup environment for running Test Runner
> > >
> > >
> > > ##############################
> > > Test: TestRunner: l2cap-tester - PASS - 2.89 seconds
> > > Run test-runner with l2cap-tester
> > > Total: 40, Passed: 40 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> > >
> > > ##############################
> > > Test: TestRunner: bnep-tester - PASS - 2.07 seconds
> > > Run test-runner with bnep-tester
> > > Total: 1, Passed: 1 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> > >
> > > ##############################
> > > Test: TestRunner: mgmt-tester - FAIL - 30.94 seconds
> > > Run test-runner with mgmt-tester
> > > Total: 448, Passed: 444 (99.1%), Failed: 1, Not Run: 3
> > >
> > > Failed Test Cases
> > > Read Exp Feature - Success                           Failed       0.012 seconds
> >
> > Looks like there is a regression on mgmt-tester:
> >
> > Read Exp Feature - Success - run
> >   Sending Read Experimental Features Information (0x0049)
> >   Test condition added, total 1
> >   Read Experimental Features Information (0x0049): Success (0x00)
> >   Invalid cmd response parameter size
> > Read Exp Feature - Success - test failed
> >
> > >
> > > ##############################
> > > Test: TestRunner: rfcomm-tester - PASS - 2.31 seconds
> > > Run test-runner with rfcomm-tester
> > > Total: 9, Passed: 9 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> > >
> > > ##############################
> > > Test: TestRunner: sco-tester - PASS - 2.20 seconds
> > > Run test-runner with sco-tester
> > > Total: 8, Passed: 8 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> > >
> > > ##############################
> > > Test: TestRunner: smp-tester - FAIL - 2.27 seconds
> > > Run test-runner with smp-tester
> > > Total: 8, Passed: 7 (87.5%), Failed: 1, Not Run: 0
> > >
> > > Failed Test Cases
> > > SMP Client - SC Request 2                            Failed       0.024 seconds
> > >
> > > ##############################
> > > Test: TestRunner: userchan-tester - PASS - 2.09 seconds
> > > Run test-runner with userchan-tester
> > > Total: 3, Passed: 3 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Regards,
> > > Linux Bluetooth
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Luiz Augusto von Dentz
>
>
>
> --
>
> Joseph Shyh-In Hwang
> Email: [e-mail]

Luiz Augusto von Dentz Aug. 19, 2021, 6:04 p.m. UTC | #5

Hi Joseph,

On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 10:49 PM Joseph Hwang <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Hi Luiz:
>
>   I am wondering if it is possible to merge these kernel patches
> before fixing the mgmt-tester?
>
>   The mgmt-tester failed due to its checking against the fixed exp
> feature count and the corresponding exp UUIDs and flags. A more
> flexible tester may be required so that the tester would not be broken
> whenever a new exp feature is added.

I would prefer to have the mgmt-tester changes applied as well so we
don't have false positives for other patches causing mgmt-tester to
fail, in fact we include CI is useful to validate this changes so we
can check the feature is correctly exposed to userspace and UUID is
properly formatted, etc, it shouldn't be a big change to mgmt-tester
thought if you just include the new UUID later on we can think about
how we could make it more extensible so it doesn't break when a new
feature is added.

> On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 5:54 PM Joseph Hwang <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > (Resent this email to contain only plaintext.)
> >
> > Hi Luiz:
> >
> >   It seems that mgmt-tester currently uses a fixed feature count.
> > Every time a new exp feature is added, the mgmt-tester would  be
> > broken. By checking the kernel, it seems that there are currently 2 or
> > 3 exp features, i.e., debug uuid, simultaneous central peripheral
> > uuid, and LL privacy uuid. Note that the debug exp feature is guarded
> > by CONFIG_BT_FEATURE_DEBUG. So I am not sure how the kernel is
> > configured and made on your test setup.
> >
> >   If we fix the mgmt-tester in bluez to have 3 or 4 (which one?)
> > features before merging the kernel changes here that adds a new
> > quality exp feature, it would not match the existing kernel which has
> > only 2 or 3 features.
> >
> >   Do you have any preference about how to fix the mgmt-tester?
> >
> >   My suggestion is to remove the checking of the feature count from
> > the mgmt-tester. The feature count changes over time. It is possible
> > to implement a customized exp_feat_check function which can be more
> > flexible. If a uuid is found in the MGMT response, its associated
> > flags are checked against.
> >
> >   The data currently used in the mgmt-tester:
> >
> > static const uint8_t read_exp_feat_param_success[] = {
> > 0x02, 0x00, /* Feature Count */
> > 0xd6, 0x49, 0xb0, 0xd1, 0x28, 0xeb, /* UUID - Simultaneous */
> > 0x27, 0x92, 0x96, 0x46, 0xc0, 0x42, /* Central Peripheral */
> > 0xb5, 0x10, 0x1b, 0x67,
> > 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, /* Flags */
> > 0x04, 0x00, 0x13, 0xac, 0x42, 0x02, /* UUID - LL Privacy */
> > 0xde, 0xb3, 0xea, 0x11, 0x73, 0xc2,
> > 0x48, 0xa1, 0xc0, 0x15,
> > 0x02, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, /* Flags */
> > };
> >
> >
> >   Please let me know what you think.
> >
> > Thanks and regards,
> > Joseph
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 1:49 AM Luiz Augusto von Dentz
> > <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Joseph,
> > >
> > > On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 6:25 AM <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This is automated email and please do not reply to this email!
> > > >
> > > > Dear submitter,
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for submitting the patches to the linux bluetooth mailing list.
> > > > This is a CI test results with your patch series:
> > > > PW Link:https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bluetooth/list/?series=531683
> > > >
> > > > ---Test result---
> > > >
> > > > Test Summary:
> > > > CheckPatch                    PASS      2.92 seconds
> > > > GitLint                       PASS      0.61 seconds
> > > > BuildKernel                   PASS      598.41 seconds
> > > > TestRunner: Setup             PASS      394.12 seconds
> > > > TestRunner: l2cap-tester      PASS      2.89 seconds
> > > > TestRunner: bnep-tester       PASS      2.07 seconds
> > > > TestRunner: mgmt-tester       FAIL      30.94 seconds
> > > > TestRunner: rfcomm-tester     PASS      2.31 seconds
> > > > TestRunner: sco-tester        PASS      2.20 seconds
> > > > TestRunner: smp-tester        FAIL      2.27 seconds
> > > > TestRunner: userchan-tester   PASS      2.09 seconds
> > > >
> > > > Details
> > > > ##############################
> > > > Test: CheckPatch - PASS - 2.92 seconds
> > > > Run checkpatch.pl script with rule in .checkpatch.conf
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ##############################
> > > > Test: GitLint - PASS - 0.61 seconds
> > > > Run gitlint with rule in .gitlint
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ##############################
> > > > Test: BuildKernel - PASS - 598.41 seconds
> > > > Build Kernel with minimal configuration supports Bluetooth
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ##############################
> > > > Test: TestRunner: Setup - PASS - 394.12 seconds
> > > > Setup environment for running Test Runner
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ##############################
> > > > Test: TestRunner: l2cap-tester - PASS - 2.89 seconds
> > > > Run test-runner with l2cap-tester
> > > > Total: 40, Passed: 40 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> > > >
> > > > ##############################
> > > > Test: TestRunner: bnep-tester - PASS - 2.07 seconds
> > > > Run test-runner with bnep-tester
> > > > Total: 1, Passed: 1 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> > > >
> > > > ##############################
> > > > Test: TestRunner: mgmt-tester - FAIL - 30.94 seconds
> > > > Run test-runner with mgmt-tester
> > > > Total: 448, Passed: 444 (99.1%), Failed: 1, Not Run: 3
> > > >
> > > > Failed Test Cases
> > > > Read Exp Feature - Success                           Failed       0.012 seconds
> > >
> > > Looks like there is a regression on mgmt-tester:
> > >
> > > Read Exp Feature - Success - run
> > >   Sending Read Experimental Features Information (0x0049)
> > >   Test condition added, total 1
> > >   Read Experimental Features Information (0x0049): Success (0x00)
> > >   Invalid cmd response parameter size
> > > Read Exp Feature - Success - test failed
> > >
> > > >
> > > > ##############################
> > > > Test: TestRunner: rfcomm-tester - PASS - 2.31 seconds
> > > > Run test-runner with rfcomm-tester
> > > > Total: 9, Passed: 9 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> > > >
> > > > ##############################
> > > > Test: TestRunner: sco-tester - PASS - 2.20 seconds
> > > > Run test-runner with sco-tester
> > > > Total: 8, Passed: 8 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> > > >
> > > > ##############################
> > > > Test: TestRunner: smp-tester - FAIL - 2.27 seconds
> > > > Run test-runner with smp-tester
> > > > Total: 8, Passed: 7 (87.5%), Failed: 1, Not Run: 0
> > > >
> > > > Failed Test Cases
> > > > SMP Client - SC Request 2                            Failed       0.024 seconds
> > > >
> > > > ##############################
> > > > Test: TestRunner: userchan-tester - PASS - 2.09 seconds
> > > > Run test-runner with userchan-tester
> > > > Total: 3, Passed: 3 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Linux Bluetooth
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Luiz Augusto von Dentz
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Joseph Shyh-In Hwang
> > Email: [e-mail]
>
>
>
> --
>
> Joseph Shyh-In Hwang
> Email: [e-mail]

Joseph Hwang Aug. 20, 2021, 5:27 a.m. UTC | #6

Hi Luiz:

The mgmt-tester change to add the UUID of the new exp feature is just
sent for review:

https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bluetooth/patch/20210820131751.BlueZ.v1.1.I165b6fc2b20d80c8d18946434005f0269d92f489@changeid/

  The tester checks the exp features UUIDs and FLAGs. As the FLAG
values depend on how the test is set up. I set the flags to be all
0x00 which passed the mgmt-tester in my local test setup. If that is
not the case upstream, please let me know.

Thanks and regards,
Joseph

On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 2:04 AM Luiz Augusto von Dentz
<[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Hi Joseph,
>
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 10:49 PM Joseph Hwang <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Luiz:
> >
> >   I am wondering if it is possible to merge these kernel patches
> > before fixing the mgmt-tester?
> >
> >   The mgmt-tester failed due to its checking against the fixed exp
> > feature count and the corresponding exp UUIDs and flags. A more
> > flexible tester may be required so that the tester would not be broken
> > whenever a new exp feature is added.
>
> I would prefer to have the mgmt-tester changes applied as well so we
> don't have false positives for other patches causing mgmt-tester to
> fail, in fact we include CI is useful to validate this changes so we
> can check the feature is correctly exposed to userspace and UUID is
> properly formatted, etc, it shouldn't be a big change to mgmt-tester
> thought if you just include the new UUID later on we can think about
> how we could make it more extensible so it doesn't break when a new
> feature is added.
>
> > On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 5:54 PM Joseph Hwang <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > >
> > > (Resent this email to contain only plaintext.)
> > >
> > > Hi Luiz:
> > >
> > >   It seems that mgmt-tester currently uses a fixed feature count.
> > > Every time a new exp feature is added, the mgmt-tester would  be
> > > broken. By checking the kernel, it seems that there are currently 2 or
> > > 3 exp features, i.e., debug uuid, simultaneous central peripheral
> > > uuid, and LL privacy uuid. Note that the debug exp feature is guarded
> > > by CONFIG_BT_FEATURE_DEBUG. So I am not sure how the kernel is
> > > configured and made on your test setup.
> > >
> > >   If we fix the mgmt-tester in bluez to have 3 or 4 (which one?)
> > > features before merging the kernel changes here that adds a new
> > > quality exp feature, it would not match the existing kernel which has
> > > only 2 or 3 features.
> > >
> > >   Do you have any preference about how to fix the mgmt-tester?
> > >
> > >   My suggestion is to remove the checking of the feature count from
> > > the mgmt-tester. The feature count changes over time. It is possible
> > > to implement a customized exp_feat_check function which can be more
> > > flexible. If a uuid is found in the MGMT response, its associated
> > > flags are checked against.
> > >
> > >   The data currently used in the mgmt-tester:
> > >
> > > static const uint8_t read_exp_feat_param_success[] = {
> > > 0x02, 0x00, /* Feature Count */
> > > 0xd6, 0x49, 0xb0, 0xd1, 0x28, 0xeb, /* UUID - Simultaneous */
> > > 0x27, 0x92, 0x96, 0x46, 0xc0, 0x42, /* Central Peripheral */
> > > 0xb5, 0x10, 0x1b, 0x67,
> > > 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, /* Flags */
> > > 0x04, 0x00, 0x13, 0xac, 0x42, 0x02, /* UUID - LL Privacy */
> > > 0xde, 0xb3, 0xea, 0x11, 0x73, 0xc2,
> > > 0x48, 0xa1, 0xc0, 0x15,
> > > 0x02, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, /* Flags */
> > > };
> > >
> > >
> > >   Please let me know what you think.
> > >
> > > Thanks and regards,
> > > Joseph
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 1:49 AM Luiz Augusto von Dentz
> > > <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Joseph,
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 6:25 AM <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > This is automated email and please do not reply to this email!
> > > > >
> > > > > Dear submitter,
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you for submitting the patches to the linux bluetooth mailing list.
> > > > > This is a CI test results with your patch series:
> > > > > PW Link:https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bluetooth/list/?series=531683
> > > > >
> > > > > ---Test result---
> > > > >
> > > > > Test Summary:
> > > > > CheckPatch                    PASS      2.92 seconds
> > > > > GitLint                       PASS      0.61 seconds
> > > > > BuildKernel                   PASS      598.41 seconds
> > > > > TestRunner: Setup             PASS      394.12 seconds
> > > > > TestRunner: l2cap-tester      PASS      2.89 seconds
> > > > > TestRunner: bnep-tester       PASS      2.07 seconds
> > > > > TestRunner: mgmt-tester       FAIL      30.94 seconds
> > > > > TestRunner: rfcomm-tester     PASS      2.31 seconds
> > > > > TestRunner: sco-tester        PASS      2.20 seconds
> > > > > TestRunner: smp-tester        FAIL      2.27 seconds
> > > > > TestRunner: userchan-tester   PASS      2.09 seconds
> > > > >
> > > > > Details
> > > > > ##############################
> > > > > Test: CheckPatch - PASS - 2.92 seconds
> > > > > Run checkpatch.pl script with rule in .checkpatch.conf
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ##############################
> > > > > Test: GitLint - PASS - 0.61 seconds
> > > > > Run gitlint with rule in .gitlint
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ##############################
> > > > > Test: BuildKernel - PASS - 598.41 seconds
> > > > > Build Kernel with minimal configuration supports Bluetooth
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ##############################
> > > > > Test: TestRunner: Setup - PASS - 394.12 seconds
> > > > > Setup environment for running Test Runner
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ##############################
> > > > > Test: TestRunner: l2cap-tester - PASS - 2.89 seconds
> > > > > Run test-runner with l2cap-tester
> > > > > Total: 40, Passed: 40 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> > > > >
> > > > > ##############################
> > > > > Test: TestRunner: bnep-tester - PASS - 2.07 seconds
> > > > > Run test-runner with bnep-tester
> > > > > Total: 1, Passed: 1 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> > > > >
> > > > > ##############################
> > > > > Test: TestRunner: mgmt-tester - FAIL - 30.94 seconds
> > > > > Run test-runner with mgmt-tester
> > > > > Total: 448, Passed: 444 (99.1%), Failed: 1, Not Run: 3
> > > > >
> > > > > Failed Test Cases
> > > > > Read Exp Feature - Success                           Failed       0.012 seconds
> > > >
> > > > Looks like there is a regression on mgmt-tester:
> > > >
> > > > Read Exp Feature - Success - run
> > > >   Sending Read Experimental Features Information (0x0049)
> > > >   Test condition added, total 1
> > > >   Read Experimental Features Information (0x0049): Success (0x00)
> > > >   Invalid cmd response parameter size
> > > > Read Exp Feature - Success - test failed
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ##############################
> > > > > Test: TestRunner: rfcomm-tester - PASS - 2.31 seconds
> > > > > Run test-runner with rfcomm-tester
> > > > > Total: 9, Passed: 9 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> > > > >
> > > > > ##############################
> > > > > Test: TestRunner: sco-tester - PASS - 2.20 seconds
> > > > > Run test-runner with sco-tester
> > > > > Total: 8, Passed: 8 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> > > > >
> > > > > ##############################
> > > > > Test: TestRunner: smp-tester - FAIL - 2.27 seconds
> > > > > Run test-runner with smp-tester
> > > > > Total: 8, Passed: 7 (87.5%), Failed: 1, Not Run: 0
> > > > >
> > > > > Failed Test Cases
> > > > > SMP Client - SC Request 2                            Failed       0.024 seconds
> > > > >
> > > > > ##############################
> > > > > Test: TestRunner: userchan-tester - PASS - 2.09 seconds
> > > > > Run test-runner with userchan-tester
> > > > > Total: 3, Passed: 3 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Linux Bluetooth
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Luiz Augusto von Dentz
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Joseph Shyh-In Hwang
> > > Email: [e-mail]
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Joseph Shyh-In Hwang
> > Email: [e-mail]
>
>
>
> --
> Luiz Augusto von Dentz

Joseph Hwang Aug. 26, 2021, 12:02 a.m. UTC | #7

(Resent in plaintext mode)

Hi Luiz:

  I have fixed the mgmt-tester on the bluez side. The "Read Exp
Feature - Success" test passed on my local test setup.

  Please let me know if there are any issues.

Thanks and regards,
Joseph


On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 1:27 PM Joseph Hwang <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Hi Luiz:
>
> The mgmt-tester change to add the UUID of the new exp feature is just
> sent for review:
>
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bluetooth/patch/20210820131751.BlueZ.v1.1.I165b6fc2b20d80c8d18946434005f0269d92f489@changeid/
>
>   The tester checks the exp features UUIDs and FLAGs. As the FLAG
> values depend on how the test is set up. I set the flags to be all
> 0x00 which passed the mgmt-tester in my local test setup. If that is
> not the case upstream, please let me know.
>
> Thanks and regards,
> Joseph
>
> On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 2:04 AM Luiz Augusto von Dentz
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Joseph,
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 10:49 PM Joseph Hwang <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Luiz:
> > >
> > >   I am wondering if it is possible to merge these kernel patches
> > > before fixing the mgmt-tester?
> > >
> > >   The mgmt-tester failed due to its checking against the fixed exp
> > > feature count and the corresponding exp UUIDs and flags. A more
> > > flexible tester may be required so that the tester would not be broken
> > > whenever a new exp feature is added.
> >
> > I would prefer to have the mgmt-tester changes applied as well so we
> > don't have false positives for other patches causing mgmt-tester to
> > fail, in fact we include CI is useful to validate this changes so we
> > can check the feature is correctly exposed to userspace and UUID is
> > properly formatted, etc, it shouldn't be a big change to mgmt-tester
> > thought if you just include the new UUID later on we can think about
> > how we could make it more extensible so it doesn't break when a new
> > feature is added.
> >
> > > On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 5:54 PM Joseph Hwang <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > (Resent this email to contain only plaintext.)
> > > >
> > > > Hi Luiz:
> > > >
> > > >   It seems that mgmt-tester currently uses a fixed feature count.
> > > > Every time a new exp feature is added, the mgmt-tester would  be
> > > > broken. By checking the kernel, it seems that there are currently 2 or
> > > > 3 exp features, i.e., debug uuid, simultaneous central peripheral
> > > > uuid, and LL privacy uuid. Note that the debug exp feature is guarded
> > > > by CONFIG_BT_FEATURE_DEBUG. So I am not sure how the kernel is
> > > > configured and made on your test setup.
> > > >
> > > >   If we fix the mgmt-tester in bluez to have 3 or 4 (which one?)
> > > > features before merging the kernel changes here that adds a new
> > > > quality exp feature, it would not match the existing kernel which has
> > > > only 2 or 3 features.
> > > >
> > > >   Do you have any preference about how to fix the mgmt-tester?
> > > >
> > > >   My suggestion is to remove the checking of the feature count from
> > > > the mgmt-tester. The feature count changes over time. It is possible
> > > > to implement a customized exp_feat_check function which can be more
> > > > flexible. If a uuid is found in the MGMT response, its associated
> > > > flags are checked against.
> > > >
> > > >   The data currently used in the mgmt-tester:
> > > >
> > > > static const uint8_t read_exp_feat_param_success[] = {
> > > > 0x02, 0x00, /* Feature Count */
> > > > 0xd6, 0x49, 0xb0, 0xd1, 0x28, 0xeb, /* UUID - Simultaneous */
> > > > 0x27, 0x92, 0x96, 0x46, 0xc0, 0x42, /* Central Peripheral */
> > > > 0xb5, 0x10, 0x1b, 0x67,
> > > > 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, /* Flags */
> > > > 0x04, 0x00, 0x13, 0xac, 0x42, 0x02, /* UUID - LL Privacy */
> > > > 0xde, 0xb3, 0xea, 0x11, 0x73, 0xc2,
> > > > 0x48, 0xa1, 0xc0, 0x15,
> > > > 0x02, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, /* Flags */
> > > > };
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >   Please let me know what you think.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks and regards,
> > > > Joseph
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 1:49 AM Luiz Augusto von Dentz
> > > > <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Joseph,
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 6:25 AM <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This is automated email and please do not reply to this email!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Dear submitter,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thank you for submitting the patches to the linux bluetooth mailing list.
> > > > > > This is a CI test results with your patch series:
> > > > > > PW Link:https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bluetooth/list/?series=531683
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ---Test result---
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Test Summary:
> > > > > > CheckPatch                    PASS      2.92 seconds
> > > > > > GitLint                       PASS      0.61 seconds
> > > > > > BuildKernel                   PASS      598.41 seconds
> > > > > > TestRunner: Setup             PASS      394.12 seconds
> > > > > > TestRunner: l2cap-tester      PASS      2.89 seconds
> > > > > > TestRunner: bnep-tester       PASS      2.07 seconds
> > > > > > TestRunner: mgmt-tester       FAIL      30.94 seconds
> > > > > > TestRunner: rfcomm-tester     PASS      2.31 seconds
> > > > > > TestRunner: sco-tester        PASS      2.20 seconds
> > > > > > TestRunner: smp-tester        FAIL      2.27 seconds
> > > > > > TestRunner: userchan-tester   PASS      2.09 seconds
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Details
> > > > > > ##############################
> > > > > > Test: CheckPatch - PASS - 2.92 seconds
> > > > > > Run checkpatch.pl script with rule in .checkpatch.conf
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ##############################
> > > > > > Test: GitLint - PASS - 0.61 seconds
> > > > > > Run gitlint with rule in .gitlint
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ##############################
> > > > > > Test: BuildKernel - PASS - 598.41 seconds
> > > > > > Build Kernel with minimal configuration supports Bluetooth
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ##############################
> > > > > > Test: TestRunner: Setup - PASS - 394.12 seconds
> > > > > > Setup environment for running Test Runner
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ##############################
> > > > > > Test: TestRunner: l2cap-tester - PASS - 2.89 seconds
> > > > > > Run test-runner with l2cap-tester
> > > > > > Total: 40, Passed: 40 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ##############################
> > > > > > Test: TestRunner: bnep-tester - PASS - 2.07 seconds
> > > > > > Run test-runner with bnep-tester
> > > > > > Total: 1, Passed: 1 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ##############################
> > > > > > Test: TestRunner: mgmt-tester - FAIL - 30.94 seconds
> > > > > > Run test-runner with mgmt-tester
> > > > > > Total: 448, Passed: 444 (99.1%), Failed: 1, Not Run: 3
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Failed Test Cases
> > > > > > Read Exp Feature - Success                           Failed       0.012 seconds
> > > > >
> > > > > Looks like there is a regression on mgmt-tester:
> > > > >
> > > > > Read Exp Feature - Success - run
> > > > >   Sending Read Experimental Features Information (0x0049)
> > > > >   Test condition added, total 1
> > > > >   Read Experimental Features Information (0x0049): Success (0x00)
> > > > >   Invalid cmd response parameter size
> > > > > Read Exp Feature - Success - test failed
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ##############################
> > > > > > Test: TestRunner: rfcomm-tester - PASS - 2.31 seconds
> > > > > > Run test-runner with rfcomm-tester
> > > > > > Total: 9, Passed: 9 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ##############################
> > > > > > Test: TestRunner: sco-tester - PASS - 2.20 seconds
> > > > > > Run test-runner with sco-tester
> > > > > > Total: 8, Passed: 8 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ##############################
> > > > > > Test: TestRunner: smp-tester - FAIL - 2.27 seconds
> > > > > > Run test-runner with smp-tester
> > > > > > Total: 8, Passed: 7 (87.5%), Failed: 1, Not Run: 0
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Failed Test Cases
> > > > > > SMP Client - SC Request 2                            Failed       0.024 seconds
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ##############################
> > > > > > Test: TestRunner: userchan-tester - PASS - 2.09 seconds
> > > > > > Run test-runner with userchan-tester
> > > > > > Total: 3, Passed: 3 (100.0%), Failed: 0, Not Run: 0
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > Linux Bluetooth
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Luiz Augusto von Dentz
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Joseph Shyh-In Hwang
> > > > Email: [e-mail]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Joseph Shyh-In Hwang
> > > Email: [e-mail]
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Luiz Augusto von Dentz
>
>
>
> --
>
> Joseph Shyh-In Hwang
> Email: [e-mail]

Luiz Augusto von Dentz Aug. 27, 2021, 5:05 p.m. UTC | #8

Hi Joseph,

On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 5:02 PM Joseph Hwang <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> (Resent in plaintext mode)
>
> Hi Luiz:
>
>   I have fixed the mgmt-tester on the bluez side. The "Read Exp
> Feature - Success" test passed on my local test setup.
>
>   Please let me know if there are any issues.

Applied, thanks.

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/bluetooth/btintel.c b/drivers/bluetooth/btintel.c
index f1705b46fc88..0fe093fa5158 100644
--- a/drivers/bluetooth/btintel.c
+++ b/drivers/bluetooth/btintel.c
@@ -1893,7 +1893,6 @@  static int btintel_bootloader_setup(struct hci_dev *hdev,
 	u32 boot_param;
 	char ddcname[64];
 	int err;
-	struct intel_debug_features features;
 
 	BT_DBG("%s", hdev->name);
 
@@ -1934,15 +1933,6 @@  static int btintel_bootloader_setup(struct hci_dev *hdev,
 		btintel_load_ddc_config(hdev, ddcname);
 	}
 
-	/* Read the Intel supported features and if new exception formats
-	 * supported, need to load the additional DDC config to enable.
-	 */
-	err = btintel_read_debug_features(hdev, &features);
-	if (!err) {
-		/* Set DDC mask for available debug features */
-		btintel_set_debug_features(hdev, &features);
-	}
-
 	/* Read the Intel version information after loading the FW  */
 	err = btintel_read_version(hdev, &new_ver);
 	if (err)
@@ -2089,7 +2079,6 @@  static int btintel_bootloader_setup_tlv(struct hci_dev *hdev,
 	u32 boot_param;
 	char ddcname[64];
 	int err;
-	struct intel_debug_features features;
 	struct intel_version_tlv new_ver;
 
 	bt_dev_dbg(hdev, "");
@@ -2125,15 +2114,6 @@  static int btintel_bootloader_setup_tlv(struct hci_dev *hdev,
 	 */
 	btintel_load_ddc_config(hdev, ddcname);
 
-	/* Read the Intel supported features and if new exception formats
-	 * supported, need to load the additional DDC config to enable.
-	 */
-	err = btintel_read_debug_features(hdev, &features);
-	if (!err) {
-		/* Set DDC mask for available debug features */
-		btintel_set_debug_features(hdev, &features);
-	}
-
 	/* Read the Intel version information after loading the FW  */
 	err = btintel_read_version_tlv(hdev, &new_ver);
 	if (err)