RE: [PATCH] Add unit test for get inkey parser

2010-04-29 Thread Gu, Yang
Hi Denis, -Original Message- From: ofono-boun...@ofono.org [mailto:ofono-boun...@ofono.org] On Behalf Of Denis Kenzior Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 9:28 AM To: ofono@ofono.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add unit test for get inkey parser Hi Yang, --- unit/test-stkutil.c | 1040

Re: [PATCH] Add unit test for get inkey parser

2010-04-29 Thread Denis Kenzior
Hi Yang, I failed to find the patch with latest code. Any problem? Forgot to push. Pushed now. Regards, -Denis ___ ofono mailing list ofono@ofono.org http://lists.ofono.org/listinfo/ofono

Re: ppp: transition to dead when read io destroyed

2010-04-29 Thread Denis Kenzior
Hi Kristen, remove call to signal_close for lcp object, it is redundent. If our io is destroyed we are dead, so transition the ppp phase to DEAD so our disconnect callback can be called. This patch has been applied, thanks. Regards, -Denis ___

Re: [PATCH] ppp: silently drop invalid packets

2010-04-29 Thread Denis Kenzior
Hi Kristen, --- gatchat/gatppp.c | 36 1 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) Patch has been applied, thanks. Regards, -Denis ___ ofono mailing list ofono@ofono.org

[PATCH] ppp: fix return of drop_packet for NETWORK phase

2010-04-29 Thread Kristen Carlson Accardi
--- gatchat/gatppp.c |2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/gatchat/gatppp.c b/gatchat/gatppp.c index f200ae7..2446d4e 100644 --- a/gatchat/gatppp.c +++ b/gatchat/gatppp.c @@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ static inline gboolean ppp_drop_packet(GAtPPP *ppp, guint16 protocol)

Re: [PATCH] ppp: fix return of drop_packet for NETWORK phase

2010-04-29 Thread Denis Kenzior
Hi Kristen, --- gatchat/gatppp.c |2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) Patch applied, thanks. Regards, -Denis ___ ofono mailing list ofono@ofono.org http://lists.ofono.org/listinfo/ofono

[PATCH 2/4][RFC] gatchat: Allow cancelling a running command.

2010-04-29 Thread Andrzej Zaborowski
Users need to be extra careful using the cancel functions because there's a potential race condition where an OK or ERROR for the command being cancelled arrives just the same moment the next command in the queue is being submitted, and is treated as a response to that command. Ideally we would

[PATCH 3/4] gatchat: Emit notification when command is sent to modem.

2010-04-29 Thread Andrzej Zaborowski
Function g_at_chat_send_with_callback takes an additional parameter that is a function to call when command is sent to hardware. --- gatchat/gatchat.c | 35 +++ gatchat/gatchat.h | 17 + 2 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff

[PATCH] phonesim: Time out +CSIM when no SIM present.

2010-04-29 Thread Andrzej Zaborowski
Send an ERROR after some time from receiving a AT+CSIM when card is not inserted. Implement cancelling pending commands. --- src/phonesim.cpp | 25 - src/phonesim.h | 10 ++ 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/phonesim.cpp

Re: [PATCH 2/4][RFC] gatchat: Allow cancelling a running command.

2010-04-29 Thread Denis Kenzior
Hi Andrew, Users need to be extra careful using the cancel functions because there's a potential race condition where an OK or ERROR for the command being cancelled arrives just the same moment the next command in the queue is being submitted, and is treated as a response to that command.

Re: [PATCH 3/4] gatchat: Emit notification when command is sent to modem.

2010-04-29 Thread Denis Kenzior
Hi Andrew, +/*! + * Same as g_at_chat_send but with an ability to return a notification the + * moment the command finally leaves the queue and is submitted to lower + * layer. + * + * This is useful for cases where the modem's response time needs to be + * measured, assuming that the

Re: [PATCH 3/4] gatchat: Emit notification when command is sent to modem.

2010-04-29 Thread Marcel Holtmann
Hi Denis, +/*! + * Same as g_at_chat_send but with an ability to return a notification the + * moment the command finally leaves the queue and is submitted to lower + * layer. + * + * This is useful for cases where the modem's response time needs to be + * measured, assuming that