From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4675099226404420357==" MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Marcel Holtmann Subject: RE: [RFC 3/5] voicecall: Add ofono_voicecall_tty_notify api Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 08:29:04 -0800 Message-ID: <1294849744.3873.89.camel@aeonflux> In-Reply-To: List-Id: To: ofono@ofono.org --===============4675099226404420357== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Jeevaka, > >> include/voicecall.h | 2 ++ > >> src/voicecall.c | 12 ++++++++++++ > >> 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > >> = > >> diff --git a/include/voicecall.h b/include/voicecall.h index > >> e37d73b..6f1bdd2 100644 --- a/include/voicecall.h > >> +++ b/include/voicecall.h > >> @@ -144,6 +144,8 @@ void ofono_voicecall_notify(struct > >> ofono_voicecall *vc, void ofono_voicecall_disconnected(struct > >> ofono_voicecall *vc, int id, enum > ofono_disconnect_reason > >> reason, const struct ofono_error > *error); > >> +void ofono_voicecall_tty_notify(struct ofono_voicecall *vc, > >> + const struct ofono_call *call); > > = > > what is the advantage of having this separate and not part of > > the regular voicecall_notify and just extending struct > > ofono_call with a field for TTY? > > = > = > Main reason for separate notification function is to avoid going through > all > the cases handled inside voicecall_notify. TTY field in ofono_call is > basically > for the GetProperties. I see. So here is the main question that comes from this now. This seems to be a bit IFX specific driven API. I still have no idea why they can not just indicate this via +CRING and have to use CTM CALL for it. Are we expecting that all modems will just establish a normal voice call and only later on signal that it is a TTY call? Any input from different vendors other than IFX. What about STE, ISI? Regards Marcel --===============4675099226404420357==--