On 1 September 2010 13:00, Jeevaka Badrappan <[email protected]> wrote: > --- > src/stk.c | 115 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 files changed, 115 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/src/stk.c b/src/stk.c > index 3fda2af..66a98b4 100644 > --- a/src/stk.c > +++ b/src/stk.c > @@ -1590,6 +1590,117 @@ static gboolean handle_command_set_up_call(const > struct stk_command *cmd, > return FALSE; > } > > +static void send_ussd_callback( int error, int dcs, const unsigned char* msg, > + int msg_len, void* userdata) > +{ > + struct ofono_stk *stk = userdata; > + struct ofono_error failure = { .type = OFONO_ERROR_TYPE_FAILURE }; > + struct stk_response rsp; > + > + if (stk->pending_cmd->send_ussd.alpha_id && > + stk->pending_cmd->send_ussd.alpha_id[0]) > + stk_alpha_id_unset(stk); > + > + switch (error) { > + case OFONO_USSD_FAILURE_NONE: > + memset(&rsp, 0, sizeof(rsp)); > + > + rsp.result.type = STK_RESULT_TYPE_SUCCESS; > + > + rsp.send_ussd.dcs = dcs; > + rsp.send_ussd.text = g_memdup(msg, msg_len); > + > + if (stk_respond(stk, &rsp, stk_command_cb)) > + stk_command_cb(&failure, stk); > + > + break; > + case OFONO_USSD_FAILURE_USER_TERMINATED: > + send_simple_response(stk, > STK_RESULT_TYPE_USSD_OR_SS_USER_TERMINATION); > + break; > + case OFONO_USSD_FAILURE_TIMED_OUT: > + send_simple_response(stk, > STK_RESULT_TYPE_NETWORK_UNAVAILABLE); > + break; > + case OFONO_USSD_FAILURE_RETURN_ERROR: > + send_simple_response(stk, STK_RESULT_TYPE_USSD_RETURN_ERROR); > + break; > + } > +} > + > +static gboolean handle_command_send_ussd(const struct stk_command *cmd, > + struct stk_response *rsp, > + struct ofono_stk *stk) > +{ > + struct ofono_modem *modem = __ofono_atom_get_modem(stk->atom); > + static unsigned char busy_on_ss_result[] = { 0x03 }; > + static unsigned char busy_on_ussd_result[] = { 0x08 }; > + int err; > + > + struct ofono_atom *cf_atom; > + struct ofono_atom *cb_atom; > + struct ofono_atom *cs_atom; > + struct ofono_atom *ussd_atom; > + > + struct ofono_call_forwarding *cf; > + struct ofono_call_barring *cb; > + struct ofono_call_settings *cs; > + struct ofono_ussd *ussd; > + > + cf_atom = __ofono_modem_find_atom(modem, > OFONO_ATOM_TYPE_CALL_FORWARDING); > + cb_atom = __ofono_modem_find_atom(modem, > OFONO_ATOM_TYPE_CALL_BARRING); > + cs_atom = __ofono_modem_find_atom(modem, > OFONO_ATOM_TYPE_CALL_SETTINGS); > + ussd_atom = __ofono_modem_find_atom(modem, OFONO_ATOM_TYPE_USSD); > + > + if (!cf_atom || !__ofono_atom_get_registered(cf_atom) || > + !cb_atom || !__ofono_atom_get_registered(cb_atom) || > + !cs_atom || !__ofono_atom_get_registered(cs_atom)) { > + > + rsp->result.type = STK_RESULT_TYPE_NOT_CAPABLE; > + return TRUE; > + }
Should this return "not capable" only when !ussd_atom? If the other atoms are missing I think we can assume they're not occupied. Best regards _______________________________________________ ofono mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ofono.org/listinfo/ofono
