Use a specific device ?

[Jean-Christian de Rivaz]

Le 11. 06. 15 01:48, Dan Williams a écrit :
> On Thu, 2015-06-11 at 00:40 +0200, Jean-Christian de Rivaz wrote:
>> Le 10. 06. 15 23:37, Bjørn Mork a écrit :
>>> Jean-Christian de Rivaz <jc at eclis.ch> writes:
>>>
>>>> There is not so
>>>> much modem manufacturers and each of them don't even release a new
>>>> product range per year.
>>> Ehh... I don't think we live on the same planet.  Did you know Toshiba
>>> is a "modem manufacturer"? Dell? HP? There are 43 (damn - I would have
>>> loved to see 42) different vendor IDs just in the option driver:
>>>
>>>    bjorn at nemi:/usr/local/src/git/linux$ git grep -E '^#define.*VENDOR' drivers/usb/serial/option.c |wc -l
>>>    43
>> Please provide a complete picture:
>> git grep -E '^#define.*VENDOR' drivers/usb/serial/* | wc -l
>> 174
>>
>> Not a such bit number. There are various vendor/product database on the
>> internet, I failed to identify a unmanageable number of modem on them.
>>
>>> Feel free to start updating the whitelists in vendor specific drivers
>>> like option, qcserial and qmi_wwan. Please let me know when those are
>>> complete.
>>>
>>> No, I don't seriously expect you to do that job.  Fact is that the
>>> whitelists are unmaintablable even when the scope is limited to one
>>> specific mode of Qualcomm based modems.  Keeping a semi-complete
>>> whitelist of all modems is not going to happen.
>>>
>> I expected this reaction. The first problem was the fact that
>> ModemManager is unable to provide a stable name to NetworkManager
>> requiring a hack in the configuration that will not work anymore if
>> there more than a single modem. Instead of making some constructives
>> propositions to find a way to sole the problem clearly caused by
>> ModemManager, the project push all his effort to reject any critic and
> I think we all agree that the stable name thing is a problem, and in
> fact I'm still open to your proposal there.

My proposal was based on the addition on a udev environment variable to 
let the user give the name he want to a particular modem and to make 
this name the reference used in ModemManager clients like 
NetworkManager. This proposed addition is optional and don't require (I 
hope) to degrade others ModemManager features. This was because my 
proposal includes udev rules that the subject changed to the white list. 
I would be pleased to get more comment on the stable name subject to try 
to find a acceptable solution for the ModemManager project.

>> constructive proposition. I proposed a way to make the transition to a
>> whitelist but you don't even comment on it: you seem only focused on
>> rejecting anything that can possibly fix the ModemManager problems.
> But I do disagree that a whitelist is the correct way forward for modem
> *identification*, which is a completely separate issue from the one
> above that we all agree still needs to be solved.

The two issues are related by the fact that both are based on udev rules 
that use vendor/product id and a udev environment variable for ModemManager.

Jean-Christian