Hi Mika,
> > > That must be a new policy then, considering that stemodem
> > is the only one that failed compilation. Feel free to fix
> > this one. The first two patches in the set are unrelated to
> > fast dormancy anyway.
> >
> > that is the whole point here. You modified the enum and the
> > compilation
> > should fail unless you add a statement for that new item.
> >
> > Let me make this clear, I do want the compilation to fail here and the
> > STE driver is doing the right thing.
>
> I understand that. As I said, feel free to fix. Fast dormancy patches 3-6
> should apply just fine without the first two courtesy patches.
I am waiting for Denis review since he was looking at them initially.
Once these are applied, we can take care of the fallout.
> > There might be other cases where this is not consistent. I
> > would prefer
> > if that never happens, but somethings things slip through even close
> > code review. If you know other cases, please let me know and
> > we fix them
> > as well here.
>
> All the other drivers implementing radio settings. Here's a couple of
> examples:
>
> ac63fd95 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-09-23 23:27:08 +0900 134) switch (mode)
> {
> ac63fd95 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-09-23 23:27:08 +0900 135) case
> OFONO_RADIO_ACCESS_MODE_ANY:
> ac63fd95 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-09-23 23:27:08 +0900 136) value
> = 1;
> ac63fd95 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-09-23 23:27:08 +0900 137) break;
> ac63fd95 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-09-23 23:27:08 +0900 138) case
> OFONO_RADIO_ACCESS_MODE_GSM:
> ac63fd95 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-09-23 23:27:08 +0900 139) value
> = 0;
> ac63fd95 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-09-23 23:27:08 +0900 140) break;
> ac63fd95 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-09-23 23:27:08 +0900 141) case
> OFONO_RADIO_ACCESS_MODE_UMTS:
> ac63fd95 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-09-23 23:27:08 +0900 142) value
> = 2;
> ac63fd95 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-09-23 23:27:08 +0900 143) break;
> ac63fd95 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-09-23 23:27:08 +0900 144) default:
> ac63fd95 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-09-23 23:27:08 +0900 145)
> CALLBACK_WITH_FAILURE(cb, data);
> ac63fd95 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-09-23 23:27:08 +0900 146)
> g_free(cbd);
> ac63fd95 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-09-23 23:27:08 +0900 147)
> return;
> ac63fd95 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-09-23 23:27:08 +0900 148) }
>
> 30b054d0 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-06-06 15:18:57 -0700 133) switch (mode)
> {
> 30b054d0 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-06-06 15:18:57 -0700 134) case
> OFONO_RADIO_ACCESS_MODE_ANY:
> 30b054d0 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-06-06 15:18:57 -0700 135) value
> = 5;
> 30b054d0 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-06-06 15:18:57 -0700 136) break;
> 30b054d0 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-06-06 15:18:57 -0700 137) case
> OFONO_RADIO_ACCESS_MODE_GSM:
> 30b054d0 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-06-06 15:18:57 -0700 138) value
> = 0;
> 30b054d0 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-06-06 15:18:57 -0700 139) break;
> 30b054d0 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-06-06 15:18:57 -0700 140) case
> OFONO_RADIO_ACCESS_MODE_UMTS:
> 30b054d0 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-06-06 15:18:57 -0700 141) value
> = 1;
> 30b054d0 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-06-06 15:18:57 -0700 142) break;
> 30b054d0 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-06-06 15:18:57 -0700 143) default:
> 30b054d0 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-06-06 15:18:57 -0700 144)
> CALLBACK_WITH_FAILURE(cb, data);
> 30b054d0 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-06-06 15:18:57 -0700 145)
> g_free(cbd);
> 30b054d0 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-06-06 15:18:57 -0700 146)
> return;
> 30b054d0 (Marcel Holtmann 2010-06-06 15:18:57 -0700 147) }
>
> Sorry, couldn't resist. ;-)
I have no problem with that being pointing out. I actually encourage
people pointing this out. This is clearly myself being stupid. And good
thing is that this is open source, so I fixed it.
With a code base of 100k lines of code and more, such things happen. And
even with Denis and myself cross-reviewing each other this will still
happen. Sometimes things just slip through the cracks. Part of
development life. So once noticed this will be dealt with.
Regards
Marcel
_______________________________________________
ofono mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ofono.org/listinfo/ofono
