On Wed, 2017-05-10 at 14:25 -0500, Dan Williams wrote: > On Wed, 2017-05-10 at 14:21 -0400, A. F. Cano wrote: > > On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 09:27:23AM -0500, Dan Williams wrote: > > > ... > > > Does the modem reply to AT+CSS with valid SID/NID values now, or > > > still > > > "?, 0"? > > > > Interesting... > > > > +CSS: ?, 22 > > > > OK > > The device is using an early form of AT+CSS, which reports only the > CDMA System ID, which is 22. This means the modem has registered > with > the network correctly and we can most likely do packet data. If it > reports '0' then it's assumed that it hasn't successfully gotten > registration far enough for data.
Ok, this phone is as dumb as a brick. I bought one off eBay and captured the USB traffic in Verizon Access Manager in Windows. The only things VZAM bothers to send are AT+CAD, AT+CSQ, various GMM/GMR/GMI to get the device and firmware version, AT+GSN for the ESN, and AT+CBC to get battery charge. That's about it. Connection is #777 as usual for CDMA. So we need to make a Motorola CDMA plugin for the e8xx phones that bypasses the AT+CSS check entirely, and just lets the connection proceed. I was unable to get a usable response to AT+CSS. I did verify that AT+MODE=2 and AT+CIND? return roaming and service status, so we could possibly use that instead of just ignoring AT+CSS. Either way, this phone needs a new plugin. Dan > > When connecting to the modem (with kermit) echo was off so my > > command > > isn't visible, but it did return the above. What does the 22 mean > > or > > imply? > > > > I have also noticed these warnings: > > > > May 6 19:12:40 fbx ModemManager[277]: <warn> Could not get > > service > > status: No AT port available to run command > > May 6 19:13:10 fbx ModemManager[277]: <warn> Could not get > > service > > status: No AT port available to run command > > May 6 19:13:40 fbx ModemManager[277]: <warn> Could not get > > service > > status: No AT port available to run command > > May 6 19:14:10 fbx ModemManager[277]: <warn> Could not get > > service > > status: No AT port available to run command > > The modem only has one serial port, and that's taken by PPP when the > data connection is active. This means there's no port available to > run > the status commands. But it's a bug this is printed at a <warn> log > level rather than <debug> or something like that. Anyway, the > message > is expected and harmless. > > > And they keep repeating every 30 seconds. > > > > I have encountered this the last time I connected. The ppp > > connection > > was working fine but this message kept repeating the whole time the > > connection was up: > > > > May 9 21:02:06 fbx NetworkManager[379]: g_signal_emit_valist: > > assertion 'G_TYPE_CHECK_INSTANCE (instance)' failed > > May 9 21:02:07 fbx NetworkManager[379]: instance with invalid > > (NULL) > > class pointer > > This would be a bug in NetworkManager. Any chance that, when this > happens, you could 'gdb attach <pid of NetworkManager>', then 'break > g_log', then 'continue'. Then next time it breaks out to the '(gdb)' > prompt, run "t a a bt" to get a backtrace. That will likely tell us > where the issue is. > > Dan > > > May 9 21:02:07 fbx NetworkManager[379]: g_signal_emit_valist: > > assertion 'G_TYPE_CHECK_INSTANCE (instance)' failed > > May 9 21:02:08 fbx NetworkManager[379]: instance with invalid > > (NULL) > > class pointer > > May 9 21:02:08 fbx NetworkManager[379]: g_signal_emit_valist: > > assertion 'G_TYPE_CHECK_INSTANCE (instance)' failed > > May 9 21:02:09 fbx NetworkManager[379]: instance with invalid > > (NULL) > > class pointer > > May 9 21:02:09 fbx NetworkManager[379]: g_signal_emit_valist: > > assertion 'G_TYPE_CHECK_INSTANCE (instance)' failed > > May 9 21:02:11 fbx NetworkManager[379]: instance with invalid > > (NULL) > > class pointer > > May 9 21:02:11 fbx NetworkManager[379]: g_signal_emit_valist: > > assertion 'G_TYPE_CHECK_INSTANCE (instance)' failed > > May 9 21:02:12 fbx NetworkManager[379]: instance with invalid > > (NULL) > > class pointer > > May 9 21:02:12 fbx NetworkManager[379]: g_signal_emit_valist: > > assertion 'G_TYPE_CHECK_INSTANCE (instance)' failed > > May 9 21:02:13 fbx NetworkManager[379]: instance with invalid > > (NULL) > > class pointer > > May 9 21:02:13 fbx NetworkManager[379]: g_signal_emit_valist: > > assertion 'G_TYPE_CHECK_INSTANCE (instance)' failed > > May 9 21:02:14 fbx NetworkManager[379]: instance with invalid > > (NULL) > > class pointer > > May 9 21:02:14 fbx NetworkManager[379]: g_signal_emit_valist: > > assertion 'G_TYPE_CHECK_INSTANCE (instance)' failed > > May 9 21:02:15 fbx NetworkManager[379]: instance with invalid > > (NULL) > > class pointer > > May 9 21:02:15 fbx NetworkManager[379]: g_signal_emit_valist: > > assertion 'G_TYPE_CHECK_INSTANCE (instance)' failed > > May 9 21:02:16 fbx NetworkManager[379]: instance with invalid > > (NULL) > > class pointer > > May 9 21:02:16 fbx NetworkManager[379]: g_signal_emit_valist: > > assertion 'G_TYPE_CHECK_INSTANCE (instance)' failed > > May 9 21:02:17 fbx NetworkManager[379]: instance with invalid > > (NULL) > > class pointer > > May 9 21:02:17 fbx NetworkManager[379]: g_signal_emit_valist: > > assertion 'G_TYPE_CHECK_INSTANCE (instance)' failed > > May 9 21:02:18 fbx NetworkManager[379]: instance with invalid > > (NULL) > > class pointer > > May 9 21:02:18 fbx NetworkManager[379]: g_signal_emit_valist: > > assertion 'G_TYPE_CHECK_INSTANCE (instance)' failed > > May 9 21:02:19 fbx NetworkManager[379]: instance with invalid > > (NULL) > > class pointer > > May 9 21:02:19 fbx NetworkManager[379]: g_signal_emit_valist: > > assertion 'G_TYPE_CHECK_INSTANCE (instance)' failed > > May 9 21:02:20 fbx NetworkManager[379]: instance with invalid > > (NULL) > > class pointer > > May 9 21:02:20 fbx NetworkManager[379]: g_signal_emit_valist: > > assertion 'G_TYPE_CHECK_INSTANCE (instance)' failed > > May 9 21:02:23 fbx NetworkManager[379]: instance with invalid > > (NULL) > > class pointer > > May 9 21:02:23 fbx NetworkManager[379]: g_signal_emit_valist: > > assertion 'G > > > > At about 2 per second, the log file quickly becomes pretty huge. > > > > Thanks again for replying. > > > > > > Augustine > > > > _______________________________________________ > > networkmanager-list mailing list > > networkmanager-list@gnome.org > > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list > > _______________________________________________ > networkmanager-list mailing list > networkmanager-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list _______________________________________________ networkmanager-list mailing list networkmanager-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
