Re: [PATCH_v0 1/5] doc: Add bearer property

[Guillaume Zajac <guillaume.zajac@linux.intel.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2013 bytes --]

Hi Denis,

On 30/11/2011 10:30, Denis Kenzior wrote:
> Hi Guillaume,
>
> On 12/02/2011 08:00 AM, Guillaume Zajac wrote:
>> ---
>>   doc/cdma-connman-api.txt |    8 ++++++++
>>   1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/doc/cdma-connman-api.txt b/doc/cdma-connman-api.txt
>> index 48699a3..bf1ec1e 100644
>> --- a/doc/cdma-connman-api.txt
>> +++ b/doc/cdma-connman-api.txt
>> @@ -35,6 +35,14 @@ Properties	boolean Powered [readwrite]
>>   			Contains whether the connection is dormant.  Will
>>   			always be false if the connection is not powered.
>>
>> +		string Bearer [readonly, optional]
>> +
>> +			Contains the data bearer technology as reported by the
>> +			service registration (if known).
>> +
>> +			Possible values are:
>> +			"none", "1x", "evdo", "svdo"
>> +
> The 1X and EVDO registration status is already handled by the
> NetworkRegistration interface (namely Strength for 1X and DataStrength
> for EV-DO).

As we propose this "bearer" property for GSM into connman-api.txt, why 
don't we for CDMA?
It would be easier to have same property in GSM and CDMA to recover the 
info at network panel level for instance to display technology used.

We have the same kind of information into network.c namely "technology", 
should we add this property also into cdma-netreg.c?
I saw it in a TODO into network-api.txt:
[...]
string Technology [readonly, optional]

             Contains the technology of the current network.

             The possible values are: "gsm", "edge", "umts", "hspa",
                             "lte"

             TODO: Values for CDMA and EVDO based networks.
[...]
We have to add the values into common.h, right?

> Whether we need an SVDO indicator is another question entirely, but it
> definitely does not belong in ConnectionManager.  All SVDO indicates is
> whether data + voice are possible simultaneously.
>

Can't we specify at least the technology?

Kind regards,
Guillaume