Hi Dara,

On 12/13/2010 02:53 PM, Dara Spieker-Doyle wrote:
> Hi Denis
> 
> On Fri, 2010-12-10 at 22:41 +0100, Spieker-Doyle Dara
> (Nokia-MS/SanDiego) wrote:
>> Hi Denis
>>
>> On Thu, 2010-12-09 at 09:43 +0100, ext Denis Kenzior wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>>  drivers/cdma-atmodem/atutil.c    |   45 +++++++++
>>>>  drivers/cdma-atmodem/atutil.h    |   65 +++++++++++++
>>>
>>> Are these verbatim copies of atmodem/atutil.[ch]?  If so, then there's
>>> no reason why you can't re-use those.  No need to copy them.
>>
>> No, they are not verbatim copies as e.g. error decoding is different.
>> Would you prefer we clarify this by renaming the files cdmautil.(ch)?
>>
> On second thoughts, I agree for this patch - I will correct this and
> re-use the drivers/atmodem/atutil.[ch].
> Additionally, for future feature support, I do envisage some delta with
> various AT utilities for CDMA. For example, with our current hardware,
> the AT return string can have a different format from the GSM AT command
> standard. 
> Do you have any particular preference in such cases as to whether we
> modify the e.g. gatchat sources directly to support this or whether we
> create CDMA specific functions within the cdma-atmodem driver?
> 

This has to be considered on a case by case basis.  I can't predict what
is the better approach until I see specifics.  Having said that, I
really hope that we do not need to change the gatchat sources directly.
 But if these changes makes sense then I certainly don't see a problem
in doing so.

Regards,
-Denis