Re: [PATCH] net: cdc_ether.c: Add SE J105i to device whitelist

[Dan Williams <dcbw@redhat.com>]

On Thu, 2010-01-07 at 09:50 +0100, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> Dan Williams <dcbw@redhat.com> writes:
> 
> > Here's the difference:
> >
> > F3507g: requires AT command setup before cdc-ether port is usable
> > SE j105i: does not require AT command setup before port is usable
> >
> > Same on my TM-506; you can simply run DHCP on the 'usb0' port and it
> > works, because the phone is pretending to be a usb-ethernet device and
> > transparently bridge between the ethernet and the cellular network.
> > That's simply not the case with the F3507g or any other WWAN card.
> >
> > Phones are fundamentally different than WWAN cards and shouldn't be
> > treated like one, at least at this time.
> 
> OK, then I misunderstood the request.  I thought that this phone behaved
> like a WWAN card since it presumably advertised the same CDC "Mobile
> Direct Line" class as the Ericsson WWAN cards, maybe even with the same
> GUID in the MDLM header?

Interesting.  But I'd be very, very skeptical if the phone really acted
just like an MBM card.  My TM-506 has *some* of the same commands that
the F3507g and the F3607gw do but certainly not all of them.

> If it really behaves like you describe (which is what the other Sony
> Ericsson phones I've seen does too), then I don't understand why it
> doesn't just advertise a CDC Ethernet class device.  That's what the
> other phones do, and as you of course know, the reason why we don't have
> a gazillion phone VID/PID entries in cdc_ether.c..

Good question; though I've seen enough hardware that I'll simply just
assume they did it differently just because they could, not for any
specific reason.  Don't over-estimate the intelligence of firmware
people, they are just as human as the rest of us :)

Dan