On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 8:52 AM, Thomas Voß <thomas.v...@rub.de> wrote: > On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 10:37 AM, Aleksander Morgado > <aleksan...@aleksander.es> wrote: >> >> On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 10:11 PM, Thomas Voß >> <thomas.voss.boc...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > MBIM does not support 3gpp location data right now. For that, >> > we make sure that the location interface is not reported as >> > supported by MBIM modems. >> > --- >> >> Ideally, we would be checking if the MBIM modem supports QMI over >> MBIM, and defaulting to the QMI implementation if so, but that >> wouldn't apply only to the location interface. >> > > +1. I was thinking whether falling back even further to AT command > sequences would make sense for > handling device specific quirks. What do you think?
Yes, we could do that in the generic MBIM implementation for things considered as standard, e.g. the 3GPP location, but you not always have AT ports when MBIM is enabled, so it really depends. Same as QMI over MBIM, not all devices support that, but probably the fallback to AT commands may be easier, as you would just need to "call the parent method" when the MBIM specific method isn't implemented; but that would need to be done per feature, not as a default thing for every method. -- Aleksander https://aleksander.es _______________________________________________ ModemManager-devel mailing list ModemManager-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/modemmanager-devel
