Re: Modem creation/startup order

2017-02-16 Thread Aleksander Morgado
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 1:31 PM, Colin Helliwell wrote: > > I'm back on this, trying to do it properly. I've removed by mod to > mm-plugin.c, and added a udev tag > > G_MODULE_EXPORT MMPlugin * > mm_plugin_create (void) > { > static const gchar *subsystems[] =

Re: Modem creation/startup order

2017-02-16 Thread Colin Helliwell
> On 15 February 2017 at 18:04 Aleksander Morgado > wrote: > ... > > The purpose of ID_MM_PHYSDEV_UID is to have the user provide a "unique > id" which may be used as name when referencing a modem, e.g. "mmcli -m > NAME"; but that also serves the purpose of binding

Re: Modem creation/startup order

2017-02-15 Thread Aleksander Morgado
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 4:16 PM, Colin Helliwell wrote: >> On 15 February 2017 at 15:07 Colin Helliwell >> wrote: >> >> > On 15 February 2017 at 14:11 Aleksander Morgado >> > wrote: >> > >> > Is the

Re: Modem creation/startup order

2017-02-15 Thread Colin Helliwell
> On 15 February 2017 at 15:07 Colin Helliwell > wrote: > > > On 15 February 2017 at 14:11 Aleksander Morgado > > wrote: > > > > Is the logic stopping there? the ID_MM_PHYSDEV_UID should take > > precedence to whatever parent sysfs

Re: Modem creation/startup order

2017-02-15 Thread Colin Helliwell
> On 15 February 2017 at 14:11 Aleksander Morgado > wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 10:46 AM, Colin Helliwell > > wrote: > > > > > I get the feeling its written with nearly-but-not-quite up to date > > > > methods, or just

Re: Modem creation/startup order

2017-02-15 Thread Aleksander Morgado
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 10:46 AM, Colin Helliwell wrote: >> > I get the feeling its written with nearly-but-not-quite up to date >> > methods, or just different ones. Certainly it's not easy to compare >> > against USB-based drivers. From what I can make out, the

Re: Modem creation/startup order

2017-02-15 Thread Colin Helliwell
> On 15 February 2017 at 09:18 Aleksander Morgado > wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Colin Helliwell > > wrote: > > > > On 14 February 2017 at 17:28 Dan Williams wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 2017-02-14 at

Re: Modem creation/startup order

2017-02-15 Thread Aleksander Morgado
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Colin Helliwell wrote: >> On 14 February 2017 at 17:28 Dan Williams wrote: >> >> On Tue, 2017-02-14 at 15:16 +, Colin Helliwell wrote: >> >> > > On 14 February 2017 at 12:59 Aleksander Morgado

Re: Modem creation/startup order

2017-02-15 Thread Colin Helliwell
> On 14 February 2017 at 17:28 Dan Williams wrote: > > On Tue, 2017-02-14 at 15:16 +, Colin Helliwell wrote: > > > > On 14 February 2017 at 12:59 Aleksander Morgado > > der.es> wrote: > > > > > > This is it. You're saying here that the "physical

Re: Modem creation/startup order

2017-02-14 Thread Dan Williams
On Tue, 2017-02-14 at 15:16 +, Colin Helliwell wrote: > > On 14 February 2017 at 12:59 Aleksander Morgado > der.es> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Colin Helliwell > > > > ... > > > > Yes, the idea is that both ports end up grabbed in the same > > > >

Re: Modem creation/startup order

2017-02-14 Thread Colin Helliwell
> On 14 February 2017 at 12:59 Aleksander Morgado > wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Colin Helliwell > ... > > > Yes, the idea is that both ports end up grabbed in the same modem. How > > > are these ports exposed by the kernel? Not via the usb subsystem

Re: Modem creation/startup order

2017-02-14 Thread Colin Helliwell
> On 14 February 2017 at 11:33 Aleksander Morgado > wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 11:39 AM, Colin Helliwell > > wrote: > > > > > Thanks. The question arises from needing to have monitoring & URCs etc > > > > on one port of my

Re: Modem creation/startup order

2017-02-14 Thread Aleksander Morgado
On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 11:39 AM, Colin Helliwell wrote: >> > Thanks. The question arises from needing to have monitoring & URCs etc on >> > one port of my mux driver, and ppp on the other - I need to make sure that >> > ppp doesn't get run on the 'monitoring'

Re: Modem creation/startup order

2017-02-14 Thread Colin Helliwell
> On 13 February 2017 at 13:40 Aleksander Morgado > wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 2:05 PM, Colin Helliwell > > wrote: > > > > > Thanks. The question arises from needing to have monitoring & URCs etc on > > one port of my mux

Re: Modem creation/startup order

2017-02-13 Thread Aleksander Morgado
On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 2:05 PM, Colin Helliwell wrote: >> > I’ve got two ports whitelisted for use by MM. What determines which one of >> > them will be ‘Modem/0’ ? >> >> Just the first modem that finishes first probing all ports. >> >> > Is there a way to get MM

Re: Modem creation/startup order

2017-02-13 Thread Colin Helliwell
> On 10 February 2017 at 17:47 Aleksander Morgado > wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 3:39 PM, wrote: > > > I’ve got two ports whitelisted for use by MM. What determines which one of > > them will be ‘Modem/0’ ? > > Just the first

Re: Modem creation/startup order

2017-02-10 Thread Aleksander Morgado
On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 3:39 PM, wrote: > I’ve got two ports whitelisted for use by MM. What determines which one of > them will be ‘Modem/0’ ? > Just the first modem that finishes first probing all ports. > Is there a way to get MM to create/initialise 0 first,

Modem creation/startup order

2017-02-10 Thread colin.helliwell
I've got two ports whitelisted for use by MM. What determines which one of them will be 'Modem/0' ? Is there a way to get MM to create/initialise 0 first, then 1 - as opposed to doing both in *parallel*? I'm getting MM to use the Cinterion plugin for my modem, by adding