From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?utf-8?Q?Bj=C3=B8rn_Mork?= Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: qmi_wwan: MC73xx interface 10 is not QMI Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 10:10:40 +0100 Message-ID: <87r3tyb08f.fsf@nemi.mork.no> References: <8761bbqker.fsf@nemi.mork.no> <20150209.141947.1972128292278697717.davem@redhat.com> <874mqucije.fsf@nemi.mork.no> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: David Miller , Kristian Evensen , "netdev\@vger.kernel.org" To: Aleksander Morgado Return-path: Received: from canardo.mork.no ([148.122.252.1]:37853 "EHLO canardo.mork.no" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753731AbbBJJKz convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Feb 2015 04:10:55 -0500 In-Reply-To: (Aleksander Morgado's message of "Tue, 10 Feb 2015 09:51:31 +0100") Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Aleksander Morgado writes: > On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 9:43 AM, Aleksander Morgado > wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 8:49 AM, Bj=C3=B8rn Mork wro= te: >> >>> I am hoping to get a second opinion from Aleksander. >> >> I have a MC7304 and a MC7354 and both work with interfaces #8 and #1= 0, >> the only difference being that #10 ends up being raw-ip by default >> instead of 802.3. I previously had old firmware in both, from early >> last year IIRC, but last week I upgraded both to the latest firmware >> available. >> >> The only case in which I've seen such a modem (a MC7304) with 1 sing= le >> valid QMI interface (actually being #8) is when the modem is put in >> "single-qmi" interface mode, which you can do forcing it to get the >> MC7710 PID, e.g. AT!UDPID=3D68A2. But otherwise, if the modem was >> exposed as 0x68c0, if#10 always worked for me... > > > BTW, regarding the patch... if interface #10 ends up being usable onl= y > in some 73xx models, I would still leave it available anyway in the > kernel driver. Userspace can always figure out whether the interface > is usable or not (e.g. MM does some QMI probing on the interface > before flagging it as usable). Yes, agreed. Thanks for the testing. Sorry Kristian, but if interface= #10 is usable on some modems with this device ID, then the driver should support those modems. So this is a NAK on the patch. > A similar issue we had with if#11 IIRC, which the sierra driver marke= d > it as being QMI but we never made it work once, so we ended up > removing it from qmi_wwan (see commit fc0d6e9cd0a). Now I wonder if w= e > should have done that only by testing it once with my hw. Yes, it would be nice if you could revisit that just to be 103% sure. I believe the driver will bind to any unbound QMI interfaces if you add the device ID using the "new_id" sysfs file, so it should be testable without rebuilding the kernel. At least on newer kernels, where the dynamic USB ids override the built-in ones. But contrary to the interface #10 situation, we have no indications tha= t #11 has ever worked for anyone. Bj=C3=B8rn