Also, please note that if you fully disable the PPP usage (maybe
making sure that data_at_primary is always NULL in
mm_base_modem_organize_ports()), what you will achieve is that the
modem ends up not usable ("Failed to find a data port in the modem").
You need to decide whether that's better t
I'm seeing this.
[16076]: [1641922135.360300] [modem0/sim0] couldn't load list of
emergency numbers: Failed to parse CRSM query result '+CRSM: 148,8,""'
Seems like the regex in mm_3gpp_parse_crsm_response needs some work. Here it is:
r = g_regex_new
("\\+CRSM:\\s*(\\d+)\\s*,\\s*(\\d
I'm looking at the errors returned by some of the GPS operations. e.g.:
/usr/bin/mmcli -m 0 --command=AT+QGPSEND
error: command failed:
'GDBus.Error:org.freedesktop.ModemManager1.Error.MobileEquipment.Unknown:
Unknown mobile equipment error: 505'
These are documented here:
https://sixfab.
Hey,
On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 11:47 AM Enrico Mioso wrote:
>
> With this architecture it will be netifd itself that retries?
>
Yes. Or at least it could be netifd doing it, if you don't have any
other monitoring application.
> Is already there a way that provides an indication for netifd to wait
With this architecture it will be netifd itself that retries?
Is already there a way that provides an indication for netifd to wait some time
before retrying? Trying to bring a bearer back up immediately might not be so
much productive.
On Tue, 11 Jan 2022, Aleksander Morgado wrote:
Date:
I am totally in agreement here.
It would be VERY nice. :)
Thanks!!
On Tue, 11 Jan 2022, Aleksander Morgado wrote:
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2022 11:17:11
From: Aleksander Morgado
To: Enrico Mioso
Cc: Peter Naulls ,
"ModemManager (development)"
Subject: Re: Extending OpenWRt ModemManager protoc
Hey,
> > In other words, I think the current situation isn't going to change so soon.
> > So I was wondering if we can provide a kind of short-cut, so the protocol
> > handler examines all bearers it finds, skipping all the modem device
> > management.
> > This would allow the code to be re-usab
Hey Enrico,
>
> In other words, I think the current situation isn't going to change so soon.
> So I was wondering if we can provide a kind of short-cut, so the protocol
> handler examines all bearers it finds, skipping all the modem device
> management.
> This would allow the code to be re-usabl
