From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0303644765007237262=="
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] atmodem: implement standard PIN retries
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 13:59:50 +0100
Message-ID: <1296478790.1520.212.camel@aeonflux>
In-Reply-To: <1296478100-24306-1-git-send-email-remi.denis-courmont@nokia.com>
List-Id: <ofono.ofono.org>
To: ofono@ofono.org

--===============0303644765007237262==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Remi,

>  drivers/atmodem/sim.c |   48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=
+++++
>  1 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> =

> diff --git a/drivers/atmodem/sim.c b/drivers/atmodem/sim.c
> index 0938998..dfd40f8 100644
> --- a/drivers/atmodem/sim.c
> +++ b/drivers/atmodem/sim.c
> @@ -57,6 +57,7 @@ static const char *cpin_prefix[] =3D { "+CPIN:", NULL };
>  static const char *clck_prefix[] =3D { "+CLCK:", NULL };
>  static const char *huawei_cpin_prefix[] =3D { "^CPIN:", NULL };
>  static const char *xpincnt_prefix[] =3D { "+XPINCNT:", NULL };
> +static const char *cpinr_prefixes[] =3D { "+CPINR:", "+CPINRE:", NULL };

if you are not processing +CPINRE, why bother consuming it in the first
place?

>  static const char *none_prefix[] =3D { NULL };
>  =

>  static void at_crsm_info_cb(gboolean ok, GAtResult *result, gpointer use=
r_data)
> @@ -554,6 +555,50 @@ error:
>  	CALLBACK_WITH_FAILURE(cb, NULL, cbd->data);
>  }
>  =

> +static void at_cpinr_cb(gboolean ok, GAtResult *result, gpointer user_da=
ta)
> +{
> +	struct cb_data *cbd =3D user_data;
> +	ofono_sim_pin_retries_cb_t cb =3D cbd->cb;
> +	GAtResultIter iter;
> +	struct ofono_error error;
> +	int retries[OFONO_SIM_PASSWORD_INVALID];
> +	size_t len =3D sizeof(at_sim_name) / sizeof(*at_sim_name);
> +	size_t i;
> +
> +	decode_at_error(&error, g_at_result_final_response(result));
> +
> +	if (!ok) {
> +		cb(&error, NULL, cbd->data);
> +		return;
> +	}
> +
> +	for (i =3D 0; i < OFONO_SIM_PASSWORD_INVALID; i++)
> +		retries[i] =3D -1;
> +
> +	g_at_result_iter_init(&iter, result);
> +
> +	/* Ignore +CPINRE results... */
> +	while (g_at_result_iter_next(&iter, "+CPINR:")) {
> +		const char *name;
> +		int val;
> +
> +		if (!g_at_result_iter_next_unquoted_string(&iter, &name))
> +			continue;
> +
> +		if (!g_at_result_iter_next_number(&iter, &val))
> +			continue;
> +
> +		for (i =3D 1; i < len; i++) {
> +			if (!strcmp(name, at_sim_name[i].name)) {
> +				retries[i] =3D val;
> +				break;
> +			}
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	cb(&error, retries, cbd->data);
> +}
> +
>  static void at_pin_retries_query(struct ofono_sim *sim,
>  					ofono_sim_pin_retries_cb_t cb,
>  					void *data)
> @@ -577,6 +622,9 @@ static void at_pin_retries_query(struct ofono_sim *si=
m,
>  =

>  		break;
>  	default:
> +		if (g_at_chat_send(sd->chat, "AT+CPINR", cpinr_prefixes,
> +					at_cpinr_cb, cbd, g_free) > 0)
> +			return;

since this command is pretty new, don't we need to check if it is
supported? Is there any impact not checking it?

Regards

Marcel



--===============0303644765007237262==--