<div dir="ltr">Yes, they are.<br>I just implemented the QMI messages that configure the functionality.<br>To be completely sure I will double check what happen when issuing QMI BIND MUX DATA PORT without any actual mux data port created. Later I will work on the code review and submit a v2 soon.<br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Mon, 20 Feb 2017 at 20:52 Aleksander Morgado <<a href="mailto:aleksander@aleksander.es">aleksander@aleksander.es</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Carlo Lobrano <<a href="mailto:c.lobrano@gmail.com" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">c.lobrano@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br class="gmail_msg">
> I've just sent the patches to libqmi. Waiting for feedbacks<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
The libqmi patches are really independent to any change done in the<br class="gmail_msg">
kernel, aren't they? i.e. we can have the libqmi support added even<br class="gmail_msg">
before the kernel has the driver changes, right?<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
--<br class="gmail_msg">
Aleksander<br class="gmail_msg">
<a href="https://aleksander.es" rel="noreferrer" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">https://aleksander.es</a><br class="gmail_msg">
</blockquote></div>