Hi Aki, > De : Aki Niemi > > Hi, > > 2010/10/21 "Benoît Monin" <benoit.mo...@gmx.fr>: > > diff --git a/src/common.c b/src/common.c > > index b5b9a6f..d571d81 100644 > > --- a/src/common.c > > +++ b/src/common.c > > @@ -655,15 +655,15 @@ const char *registration_tech_to_string(int tech) > > case ACCESS_TECHNOLOGY_GSM: > > return "gsm"; > > case ACCESS_TECHNOLOGY_GSM_COMPACT: > > - return "gsm"; > > + return "gprs"; > > case ACCESS_TECHNOLOGY_UTRAN: > > return "umts"; > > case ACCESS_TECHNOLOGY_GSM_EGPRS: > > return "edge"; > > case ACCESS_TECHNOLOGY_UTRAN_HSDPA: > > - return "hspa"; > > + return "hsdpa"; > > case ACCESS_TECHNOLOGY_UTRAN_HSUPA: > > - return "hspa"; > > + return "hsupa"; > > case ACCESS_TECHNOLOGY_UTRAN_HSDPA_HSUPA: > > return "hspa"; > > case ACCESS_TECHNOLOGY_EUTRAN: > > Do you need to know if the cell supports high speed uplink, downlink > or both; or in fact, when uplink or downlink is active (i.e., channel > allocated)? Currently the API is telling you the former, and > supporting the latter would require changes not only in the D-Bus API, > but also in the driver API. > The API is fine as-is, we just need a bit more details about the technology in use. It will be purely informative in our application anyway.
> As a side note, I think I was originally proposing using the > generation tags, but either way works for me. That is, I consider it > 3.5G when at least HSDPA is available. > I was just thinking out loud about a "generation" field, I don't have any need for it. And it can be obtained from the technology (correct me if I'm wrong) : gsm -> 2G gprs, edge -> 2.5G umts -> 3G hsdpa, hsupa, hspa -> 3.5G lte -> 4G -- Benoît. _______________________________________________ ofono mailing list ofono@ofono.org http://lists.ofono.org/listinfo/ofono
