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 <j...@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@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. > 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. Dan > >> The 40-usb_modeswitch.rules required by some > >> modems is not so big either. > > There are approximately a gazillion modem IDs which do *not* need mode > > switching. But list size is irrelevant in any case. See below. > > So why did the list exists? > > >> But most important is to understand that the current ModemManager is > >> abusing the udev concept and confusing the users. Are you really > >> serious when you ask a random people with a new UPS product to add a > >> new udev rule to the ModemManager project? > > Why do they have to do that? Their UPS should work fine even if MM > > happens to probe it. > > So why did you need blacklist in the first place? The only fact that the > blacklist exists is a prove that users don't want probing for non modem > device. The UPS is maybe not the best example, but you can't deny the > reality of the blacklist. > > >> I think you are so focused > >> on defending the current ModemManager abomination that you fail to see > >> the problem from the point of view of a common user. > > So, let's try to agree what a common user wants. My claim is that the > > common user wants *both* their UPS and 3G modem to work by default. > > > >> The length of a > >> white list is not an excuse to not fix the problem. > > Agreed. The length is irrelevant. The problem is that the list will be > > incomplete, whether it is a blacklist or whitelist. We could probably > > discuss which one will be easiest to maintain, but that's really > > irrelevant too. The real question is what happens to the user > > requirements in the two cases, assuming that we don't have any prior > > knowledge of the devices (which is very likely for any device you can > > buy new in a store): > > > > whitelist: > > UPS works > > 3G modem fails > > > > blacklist: > > UPS works, but is unnecessarily probed by MM > > 3G modem works > > > > The choice is really simple, isn't it? MM does what it has to do. > > > > Now you have completely changed the situation that cause problem to a > situation where you don't see a problem. You may be happy doing this, > but the former problem is still there and unsolved. > > Jean-Christian > > _______________________________________________ > ModemManager-devel mailing list > modemmanager-de...@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/modemmanager-devel _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel