From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2091520660108301233==" MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Denis Kenzior Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] sierra: Support CDMA modems Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2013 14:52:09 -0600 Message-ID: <51365AF9.6040600@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20130305193619.GK11149@alittletooquiet.net> List-Id: To: ofono@ofono.org --===============2091520660108301233== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Forest, >>> I'm looking to pick this series back up now. I understand the implemen= tation is >>> not ideal, but it at least provides for basic connectivity until we hav= e support >>> for the CnS protocol. Will you accept the full series if I address the= other >>> issues with the code that you mentioned? >> >> If we accept something upstream we assume full responsibility for >> the code, and everything that entails, including future maintenance. >> Thus we do not have a habit of accepting functionality that is >> inherently broken. So unless you can convince me otherwise, my >> answer is: "I'd rather not" ;) > > Well I think the argument to make is that we ought to be able to graceful= ly > degrade to handle a device that we have limited support for. We know how= to > bring up a connection on this device. I think users would prefer to have= a > device that works with a limited feature set than one that doesn't work a= t all. Don't get me wrong, we do want to enable as many devices as possible... = The problem is that the oFono clients do not know when the device is in = 'degraded' mode. Our assumption was that we always have multiple AT = ports available or we are using high-speed interfaces. If the AT chat = is blocked by PPP, then we can't even get basic things like signal = strength notifications while on a data connection. To me that is = unacceptable, especially since we know that any AT command based = implementation is a long-term dead end. > > Anyway, I notice that one of the ports appears to be QCDM. It appears th= at QCDM > support is partially implemented in oFono? But I don't know QCDM at all.= Can > we use it to do netreg? oFono QCDM support is quite bare, not much beyond a test tool. = Contributions are always welcome! > > If not, I could probably implement (partial) CnS support at some point. = I'm > just not sure I will have time to do it right away. > That would be great. > I assume a proper netreg implementation on one of these other ports would > address your primary concern? Yep, correct. > > Thanks, > Forest Regards, -Denis --===============2091520660108301233==--