On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 19:33 +0100, Rick Jones wrote: > --On Wednesday, July 01, 2009 08:11:51 -0400 Dan Williams > <d...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Ok, we need to figure out what commands it actually responds to, and > see > > if there's some way to distinguish the specific ports. Are you able > to > > get a program like minicom or screen running on the ports so we can > try > > out some commands. If you can do that, try the following commands > on > > all the ports the modem exposes, and let me know what they return > > (including what port you entered it on): > > > > ATI > > AT+CGMM > > AT+CGAP? > > Using minicom, both ports give identical responses to all these: > ATI: > Manufacturer: ZTE INCORPORATED > Model: MF627 > Revision: BD_3GHAP673A4V1.0.0B02 > IMEI: 358066024082082 > +GCAP: +CGSM,+DS,+ES > > AT+CGMM: > MF627 > > AT+CGAP? is ERROR, or did you mean AT+GCAP: > +GCAP: +CGSM,+DS,+ES > (same as last line of ATI response). > > Functionality is definitely tied to the IF number. IF0 is effectively > dead (supposedly NMEA, but I don't know what it's meant to support). > IF1 & IF3 both behave like a modem (usually), and seem very closely > tied together. E.g. if you use ATE0 to turn off echo on one port, it > is turned off on both. Very occasionally, IF1 will not respond to AT > commands, but the modem still works on the correct IF3 port, and IF1 > still spits out messages.
How often does IF1 spit out messages? What do they look like? Dan > UMs always come out together on both ports (except when IF3 is > connected of course). > > I haven't tried every possible AT command, but AFAICS from those I > have tried, they all work the same on both ports, EXCEPT for dialling. > A valid ATDT string on IF3 produices an immediate CONNECTED response, > but on IF1 there is no response, and the port hangs. This also > effectively crashes the device, because once you disconnect from the > ports the device shuts down and all the ttyUSB nodes disappear. > > I kinda wonder if the device is actually really buggy and IF1 is not > supposed to accept commands at all. > > I can't see any way to detect the difference between the ports > heuristically, it seems to need hard-coded knowledge of IF3. I started > using it on an earlier OS, Ubuntu 8.10 (Hardy), and that required > addition of a custom fdi file that explicitly identified IF3 as a GSM > modem, and it always used the correct port. I can't remember exactly > what kernel version that was. > > Now with 2.6.29 that file isn't necessary, and there doesn't seem to > be any reference to the device in the standard fdi files, so the > mechanism is different, but I don't quite understand how. Maybe it's > because Hardy used NM 0.7.0 ? > > It would be good to be able to use HAL or similar to explicitly > declare the interface, or even declare IF1 as non-available just to > stop it being probed. Is that possible? > > > Second, do any of the non-usable ports spontaneously emit messages? > > Huawei devices emit a variety of AT^BOOT, AT^RSSI, etc on the > secondary > > port that can't be used for PPP, and that's something we can detect. > > To confirm what I said above, all the spontaneous UMs are identical on > both ports, so not muc help there :( > > Not sure where this gets us ... > > -- > Cheers > Rick _______________________________________________ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list