btle: Add definitions for Bluetooth 5.0 control PDUs

[rugeGerritsen]

The changes only support using scapy as a packet builder.
Dissection is not yet implemented.

I've used #2215 by @Matheus-Garbelini as a starting point.

closes #2215

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #3037 (cd9a08d) into master (27545d8) will decrease coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #3037      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   85.37%   85.36%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         255      256       +1     
  Lines       53971    54113     +142     
==========================================
+ Hits        46076    46196     +120     
- Misses       7895     7917      +22     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
scapy/layers/bluetooth4LE.py	96.10% <100.00%> (+4.21%)	⬆️
scapy/layers/can.py	94.63% <0.00%> (-1.45%)	⬇️
scapy/arch/windows/__init__.py	68.25% <0.00%> (-0.58%)	⬇️
scapy/data.py	87.85% <0.00%> (-0.52%)	⬇️
scapy/contrib/automotive/gm/gmlanutils.py	88.26% <0.00%> (-0.50%)	⬇️
scapy/contrib/automotive/gm/gmlan.py	92.33% <0.00%> (-0.36%)	⬇️
scapy/utils.py	78.60% <0.00%> (-0.31%)	⬇️
scapy/fields.py	91.20% <0.00%> (-0.29%)	⬇️
scapy/layers/dot11.py	90.53% <0.00%> (-0.04%)	⬇️
scapy/layers/dhcp.py	87.34% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 8 more

[Matheus-Garbelini]

@rugeGerritsen thanks a lot. Dissection may be implemented after adding def dissection_done to the BTLE_DATA class as suggested by @guedou here: #2192 (comment)
In short, it appears empty PDUs or packets with no attributes cannot be dissected if they are empty. One workaround is to forcibly call the lines bellow:

scapy/scapy/layers/bluetooth4LE.py

Lines 362 to 363 in 962a95a

	p = conf.raw_layer(s, _internal=1, _underlayer=self)
	self.add_payload(p)

I couldn't confirm this at the time so feel free to try this out.
Thanks a lot for following up on this PR.

[rugeGerritsen]

@Matheus-Garbelini , thanks for your feedback. I will leave the dissection as is for now. The last push only initializes the base class of BTLEPhysField in a more pythonic way. Unfortunately it still fails with:

Expression "(super(BTLEPhysField, self).__init__(name, default, -8, ['phy_1m', 'phy_2m', 'phy_coded']), )" is assigned to nothing

I'm familiar enough with pylint to understand what is wrong here

[gpotter2]

Apart from two minor cosmetic comments (that you can probably ignore), this LGTM !
Thanks for the PR

[rugeGerritsen]

@gpotter2 , thanks for your review!