From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6359528507981415454==" MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Jessica Nilsson Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] isimodem2.5: Changes to add isimodem2.5 Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2010 12:36:19 +0100 Message-ID: <4D00BF33.1050801@stericsson.com> In-Reply-To: List-Id: To: ofono@ofono.org --===============6359528507981415454== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Aki, > The CBS topics set is simply not implemented in the current cbs > driver. I suggest you create a patch for adding that into the current > driver. > > = > And same for the clear_topics callback. Yes, I might be able to do that. I can not test it though, I haven't = got any isimodem HW. I assume you mean submitting a patch to the isimodem for this? > This has no business being in the isimodem driver. I suppose it was > included by mistake. > = Yes, sorry. > > So the IMEI is not stored on the modem at all. This obviously needs a > quirk, but I wonder if it would be cleaner to handle this in the modem > plugin. See for example how GPIO lines are handled in the n900 driver. > > = Right, we will look into that and probably get back to you on this with = questions. > Is there actually anything different here, except for the name change? > It's using a forked version of GIsiPipe, but I'm pretty sure we can > just add the missing bits into the existing GIsiPipe class. > = Yes, that could be a solution. > Just adding the decoding for NET_MODEM_ subblocks here would be > enough. In fact, these subblocks look almost identical to the existing > NET_ subblocks, so adding just extra case statements with the new > codepoints would probably work, too. > = That would certainly look neater. :-) > I think this is a bad idea. I know you're using NET_CS_CONTROL_REQ > here to implement the unregister callback, but the this is basically > just wrapping existing PN_MTC functionality. In general, ISI modems > don't seem to understand what a deregister even means. > > In fact, even the D-Bus method seems of little value, and I would > remove it altogether. In any case, leaving this unimplemented is my > preference. > = Ok, we can see if this works for us, but you are probably right. > This is different from the current netreg driver. However, it's easy > enough to alternate, see below. > = > I would suggest probing for both PN_NETWORK and PN_MODEM_NETWORK here. > Then which ever answers first gets used. After we know with which > resource we're working with, overloading a few of the ISI messages is > enough to make this driver work with both versions of modems. > = Seems pretty straighforward. > I didn't go through all of the patch, but from what I can see, we can > pretty well fold the WG2.5 modem support into the existing drivers. > = We'll get back to you on that when we have had another look at this and = your other suggestions. Thanks for your comments. :-) Best Regards, Jessica --===============6359528507981415454==--