Hi Denis, >>> So you might need to expand on this some more. What is QMI+AT or >>> MBIM+AT actually doing? Is there a single AT port? Multiple? What is >>> the AT port being used for, just vendor specific APIs or something more? >> MBIM and QMI are actually used only for the gprs-context atom. >> The modems can work with the mbim or gobi plugin if they support the >> respective protocols (I have tested them with changes in udevng), but >> then we only get the bare minimum: no configuration options, hardware >> monitor, low-power mode, gnss and its options, and the rest. >> So, given that we need the AT interface anyway, everything is done >> through it. It is also easier to debug than the big binary blog >> (admittedly, wireshark helps a lot for mbim, but not sure for qmi). > > You really need to decide what you want to do here. If your modem is MBIM, > then MBIM driver needs to be used. I really don't want to get into > situations where we build some Frankenstein driver with gprs-context being > driven via MBIM and netreg being driven via AT commands. > > I can understand if you have MBIM + a GPS/GNSS port and want to expose > location-reporting on that. Ok, fine, I get that. I can also understand if > you want to use the AT command port for some vendor specific extensions not > available via MBIM. But I would need serious convincing of anything beyond > this.
I think that MBIM (and even QMI) have AT passthrough options. So by all means, the main transport suppose to be MBIM here. I always prefer if only one hardware port is opened and there is no need to open more. Regards Marcel _______________________________________________ ofono mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ofono.org/mailman/listinfo/ofono
