> -----Original Message----- > From: Tomasz Gregorek [mailto:tomasz.grego...@gmail.com] > Sent: 22 February 2011 16:09 > To: ofono@ofono.org > Cc: Nayani Vijay > Subject: Re: [PATCH] atmodem: CEREG support for LTE network > status reporting in AT modem > > Hi Vijay > > > 2011/2/22 <vijay.nay...@elektrobit.com> > > > > > > Subject: [PATCH] atmodem: CEREG support for LTE network > > status reporting in AT modem > > > > [PATCH] atmodem: CEREG support for LTE network status > > reporting in AT modem Tomasz Gregorek tomasz.gregorek at > > gmail.com Thu Feb 17 19:52:45 PST 2011 > > > > * Previous message: [PATCH 2/5] bluetooth: add a > > bluetoothd connect watch > > * Next message: Problem with SIM lock states not showing > > correctly in Ofono API. > > * Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ > subject ] [ author ] > > > > From: Tomasz Gregorek <tomasz.gregorek at stericsson.com> > > > > > This is a proposal for CEREG support based on the AT modem. > > Support in driver should work, though I have an issue > with the core. > > > > The core has one gprs status currently. In case of having > > second status for LTE, there is need of having two satuses, > > one for each, 3G and LTE, or to combine those two into one. > > > > I took second approach as it leaves current oFono API, though > > it is not perfect. > > > I have been working on solution that comprises of > separate eps atom and > corresponding driver. Code has been tested against > modified phonesim for > eps.Will provide an RFC patch soon once I bring it to > certain logical > end. > > Regards, > Vijay > > > > This is what I was thinking about too. > For me, from status point of view, both networks look very > similar, thats why I was thinking about using gprs atom / > driver for status handling and create separate atom for QoS / IMS. >
I agree with you , both bearers are almost similar.Minor difference i see are context managment (especially default context creation) and some eps related spill over on other existing atoms (For ex SIM would not contain some ISIM (IMPU/IMPI)related stuff).My idea is seperate atoms solution would even work for legacy switch back(CSFB) too with a minimal impact on exiting architecture.Your comments on these ideas would also very valuable here as i assume you have real modem unlike me. > I am at most interested in your solution. I know from Denis > that this is what was agreed. > > Br > Tomasz Gregorek > Will submit the rfc patch and short design write up once i have code ready. Br, Vijay _______________________________________________ ofono mailing list ofono@ofono.org http://lists.ofono.org/listinfo/ofono
