Hi!

> * Pavel Machek <pavel@???> [200425 18:34]:
> > Hmm, I like motmdm* interface. I'd suggest we keep it.
> >
> > > Based on comments from Johan, we want to keep the /dev/gsmmux* support
> > > as is for serdev users too. Presumably most serdev-ngsm users would
> > > not need any custom handling, and only we are really stuck with the
> > > custom packet IDs AFAIK.
> >
> > ? I'm not sure I understand this or its implications.
>
> Well if we can use /dev/gsmmux* interface directly, we save about
> 300 lines of kernel code that does not really help us because it
> still does not make the modem AT compatible.

True. But you still need that code for /dev/gnss0 and for the mixers,
right?

And using motmdm* manually is possible, why doing the same with
gsmmux* will be more tricky.

> Earlier I was thinking we may not want to use /dev/gsmmux* at all
> with serdev drivers. But it's already there and working, using it
> leaves out a bunch of code compared to maintaining the additional
> chardev support.

> > > For sending continuation messages, they start with just "U" with no
> > > packet ID. And for the packet ID, we can just use something similar
> > > to what kernel is using with jiffies % 10000.
> >
> > But yes, this should be doable, too.
>
> OK. So let's try to first figure out a way for ofono raw read/write
> functions using the current /dev/motmdm* interface. Then after that
> works, let's try to flip over to using /dev/gsmmux* interface. I need
> to update the kernel patches for that too for a generic serdev-ngsm.

I'm not saying this is impossible. ofono accesses qmi, and writing raw
data into device files is not exactly a rocket science. But it might
be a bit of work...

Best regards,

                                    Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html