From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6856783356847361335=="
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Guillaume Zajac <guillaume.zajac@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] emulator: add AT hook_control_cb() CB and register it
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 10:02:14 +0200
Message-ID: <4D92E386.3060506@linux.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <4D92A853.7000002@gmail.com>
List-Id: <ofono.ofono.org>
To: ofono@ofono.org

--===============6856783356847361335==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Denis,

On 30/03/2011 05:49, Denis Kenzior wrote:
> Hi Guillaume,
>
> On 03/24/2011 05:25 AM, Guillaume Zajac wrote:
>> ---
>>   src/emulator.c |   44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>>   1 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/src/emulator.c b/src/emulator.c
>> index c84f0a9..586c7ec 100644
>> --- a/src/emulator.c
>> +++ b/src/emulator.c
>> @@ -177,6 +177,41 @@ error:
>>   	g_at_server_send_final(em->server, G_AT_SERVER_RESULT_ERROR);
>>   }
>>
>> +static void hook_control_cb(GAtServer *server, GAtServerRequestType typ=
e,
> Can you rename this dun_ath_cb, since this is pretty much dun specific
Ok I will do it.
>> +			GAtResult *result, gpointer user_data)
>> +{
>> +	struct ofono_emulator *em =3D user_data;
>> +	GAtResultIter iter;
>> +	int val;
>> +
>> +	DBG("");
>> +
>> +	if (type !=3D G_AT_SERVER_REQUEST_TYPE_SET)
>> +		goto error;
> Wouldn't we be also getting G_AT_SERVER_REQUEST_TYPE_COMMAND_ONLY here?
Sorry I forgot it. I will add thise case.
>> +
>> +	if (em->ppp =3D=3D NULL)
>> +		goto error;
>> +
>> +	g_at_result_iter_init(&iter, result);
>> +	g_at_result_iter_next(&iter, "");
>> +
>> +	if (g_at_result_iter_next_number(&iter,&val) =3D=3D FALSE)
>> +		goto error;
>> +
>> +	if (val !=3D 0)
>> +		goto error;
>> +
>> +	g_at_ppp_unref(em->ppp);
>> +	em->ppp =3D NULL;
>> +
>> +	g_at_server_send_final(server, G_AT_SERVER_RESULT_OK);
>> +
>> +	return;
>> +
>> +error:
>> +	g_at_server_send_final(server, G_AT_SERVER_RESULT_ERROR);
>> +}
>> +
>>   static void brsf_cb(GAtServer *server, GAtServerRequestType type,
>>   			GAtResult *result, gpointer user_data)
>>   {
>> @@ -466,10 +501,13 @@ void ofono_emulator_register(struct ofono_emulator=
 *em, int fd)
>>
>>   	__ofono_atom_register(em->atom, emulator_unregister);
>>
>> -	if (em->type =3D=3D OFONO_EMULATOR_TYPE_DUN)
>> +	if (em->type =3D=3D OFONO_EMULATOR_TYPE_DUN) {
>>   		g_at_server_register(em->server, "D", dial_cb, em, NULL);
>> -	else if (em->type =3D=3D OFONO_EMULATOR_TYPE_HFP)
>> -		g_at_server_set_echo(em->server, FALSE);
>> +		g_at_server_register(em->server, "H", hook_control_cb, em, NULL);
>> +	} else {
>> +		if (em->type =3D=3D OFONO_EMULATOR_TYPE_HFP)
>> +			g_at_server_set_echo(em->server, FALSE);
> I'd really prefer this to use a switch/case statement.
Ok.
>> +	}
>>   }
>>
>>   static void emulator_remove(struct ofono_atom *atom)

This patch is also in the set of patches I have sent for escape sequence =

detection because I needed it to complete gsmdial tests.
Should I resend the set of patches with this patch updated ? or I should =

wait for your feedback on the complete set of patches?

Kind regards,
Guillaume


--===============6856783356847361335==--