Re: [PATCH] mbm: add quirks for Dell D5530

[Denis Kenzior <denkenz@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1914 bytes --]

Hi Marcel,

On 08/25/2010 01:05 PM, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> Hi Denis,
> 
>>> Dell D5530 is an OEM version of F3507g. It has an annoying habit of
>>> announcing itself to world with its own name. It also crashes upon
>>> processing received cbs messages.
>>> ---
>>>  plugins/mbm.c |   55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>  1 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/plugins/mbm.c b/plugins/mbm.c
>>> index c9b0ea4..1c2b9a8 100644
>>> --- a/plugins/mbm.c
>>> +++ b/plugins/mbm.c
>>> @@ -53,9 +53,15 @@ static const char *cfun_prefix[] = { "+CFUN:", NULL };
>>>  static const char *cpin_prefix[] = { "+CPIN:", NULL };
>>>  static const char *none_prefix[] = { NULL };
>>>  
>>> +enum mbm_variant {
>>> +	MBM_GENERIC,
>>> +	MBM_DELL_D5530,		/* OEM of F3507g */
>>> +};
>>> +
>>>  struct mbm_data {
>>>  	GAtChat *modem_port;
>>>  	GAtChat *data_port;
>>> +	enum mbm_variant variant;
>>>  	guint poll_source;
>>>  	guint poll_count;
>>>  	gboolean have_sim;
>>> @@ -137,9 +143,50 @@ static gboolean init_simpin_check(gpointer user_data)
>>>  	return FALSE;
>>>  }
>>>  
>>> +static void d5530_notify(GAtResult *result, gpointer user_data)
>>> +{
>>> +	DBG("D5530");
>>> +}
>>> +
>>
>> Should we really bother with this one? Or you're trying to be like
>> Marcel and waste some processing time with unused unsolicited
>> notifications? :)
> 
> I think we should until we have this all figured out. More debug output
> is always a good thing.
> 
> And yes, essentially there is some processing wasted, but then again,
> this hardware is so damn stupid broken it deserves to be punished ;)
> 

I have to disagree, I can understand if you take the unsolicited
notification and break it down somewhat (like we used to with OCTI,
OWCTI, etc for HSO).  But just printing a debug seems useless.

Regards,
-Denis