From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6580740984361757682==" MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Denis Kenzior Subject: Re: Cinterion EHS6 support Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 14:17:45 -0500 Message-ID: <55412E59.3090506@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <55412CD7.3030600@dynamicdevices.co.uk> List-Id: To: ofono@ofono.org --===============6580740984361757682== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Alex, > > I understand. I am not sure what the differences are between the tc65 > and the ehs6. I'll speak with Gemalto/Cinterion to get some > clarification on this. Sure. In the past we have found that the modem firmware is similar = enough that no changes are needed between different modem families from = the same manufacturer. There were one or two exceptions of course. > > My thought process for splitting it out was along these lines: > > At present I am focussed just on supporting a data-connection for one of > our boards with the EHS6 on it with connman/ofono. > > We'll be working with the EHS6 and probably the EHS5 extensively over > the next few years on a range of board products so I will likely be > testing out other functionalities for the EHS6 such as voice, sms etc. > etc. I imagine. > > I can prove this out on our hardware and provide any needed patches > upstream if that is of use. > > But we don't plan to make use of the TC65 and so I can't commit to > ensuring that anything I implement for the EHS6 would work for the TC65, > or indeed wouldn't break the current TC65 implementation. Some things can be done by eye-balling the code. For example, I just = ran a diff on the code you submitted. The only difference between = plugins/ehs6.c and plugins/tc65.c is the vendor quirk for = ofono_netreg_create. Something that tc65 also probably needs. > > I assumed that the current tc65 code worked, although it wasn't working > for me on the ehs6, and as I don't know what's' going on there I was > keen not to make any potentially breaking changes that might cause > others problems. I'm not quite sure why that would be the case. Registering for CIND = indications that will never come should not cause any significant issues... > > Can I come back to you with the response from Cinterion/Gemalto on > differences/similarities between TC65 and EHS5/6 and then you can decide > whether the patch needs refactoring? Sure Regards, -Denis --===============6580740984361757682==--