On 22/04/2020 15:07, Aleksander Morgado wrote:
>> What's the best strategy to connect a modem as per user configuration when
>> we "get" one visible in ModemManager?
> Using NetworkManager? NM takes care of all that process, keeping the
> connection settings as NM profiles. Is this not working
Hello,
When debugging the problems with Quectel EC25 I was getting this error:
QMI protocol error (14): ''CallFailed'' call end reason (1):
''generic-unspecified'', verbose call end reason (3,1069): [cm] (null)
These call end error codes seem to be documented here:
Hi Paul,
Thanks for your response...
On 16/04/2020 18:38, Paul Bartell wrote:
> Alternatively, you can clear these settings each time a new SIM is
> inserted with qmi WDS Modify Profile.
> Setting the APN of profile 1 to an empty string will cause the modem
> to use the network provided default
Hello,
We've got some EC25, and found the following bug...
On all tested EC25 firmware versions.
With ModemManager 1.10.0 and libqmi 1.22.0 and also with ModemManager
1.12.6 and libqmi 1.24.8.
Due to the QMI bug recently described on this list, these modems have
previously been occasionally
On 16/10/2019 15:38, Alejandro Vega wrote:
> Ok, yes, that is exactly what I am expecting to see. I would be pleased
> if you could confirm me that the modem I am using does not support this
> feature.
Possibly also worth pointing out that some modem implementations do not
connect the sim-change
On 11/02/2019 14:38, Belisko Marek wrote:
> I'm working on embedded system which will have internet connection over
> GSM. I can setup connection manually. My point is to have everything
> automatically set (so no user intervention).
> So question is if MondeManager support kind of automatic
On 04/12/2018 10:50, Aleksander Morgado wrote:
> I've been asked whether we can have MM 1.10 soon, to get it integrated
> in Debian early enough and ready for Ubuntu 19.04.
BTW, the initial (transition) freeze for Debian version 10 "Buster" is
2019-01-12.
On 11/08/17 14:09, Aleksander Morgado wrote:
> I'd suggest we try to move
> that modem to "Failed" state instead, as we really lost the control
> port; and let the applications using MM do whatever they need to do
> with a failed modem, including external power cycle or whatever.
Hi,
Yes that
On 08/08/17 08:14, Aleksander Morgado wrote:
> What we usually do here is to setup a Context struct for the
> operation, and define a set of STEPs for a small state machine that
> defines the operation.
Thanks for that.
One snag I've come across is that I want to run this during the
Hello,
As previously discussed, the disconnection code currently does no
checking to verify that the modem has come back into command mode (it
just drops DTR for a second, and hopes for the best) i.e.
[Drop DTR]
[end disconnect sequence, assuming modem is back in command mode]
I'd like to
Hi Aleksander,
I'm having a go at building the extended reset/hangup (with checking)
logic on top of this, if you wanted to go ahead and apply this in the
meantime?
Cheers,
Tim.
On 25/07/17 13:48, Aleksander Morgado wrote:
> The init-sequence configured for the TTY that is being used as data
>
On 27/07/17 11:16, Aleksander Morgado wrote:
ENV{ID_MM_TTY_DTR_BROKEN}="1"
ENV{ID_MM_TTY_RTSCTS_BROKEN}="1"
> If these are useful enough, we could add them. Although from my point
> of view, if the only drawback of not specifying these is that we e.g.
> run additional steps trying
On 26/07/17 18:02, Aleksander Morgado wrote:
>> ENV{ID_MM_TTY_DTR_BROKEN}="1"
>>
>> ENV{ID_MM_TTY_RTSCTS_BROKEN}="1"
>>
>> is the right thing to do?
>>
>
> I'm assuming you're thinking in users providing these udev tags for
> custom setups, right?
Yep.
> Out of curiosity; are you testing the
On 26/07/17 17:51, Aleksander Morgado wrote:
>> I wonder if issuing ATZ is the right thing to do here at all?
>>
>> It's trying to reset the modem to a well-known state, but ATZ doesn't do
>> that - it loads the default user defined profile - which could be
>> anything that the user or another
On 25/07/17 12:47, Aleksander Morgado wrote:
> A quick solution would be to subclass the enabling_modem_init() step
> and after running the parent method, run a Telit specific setup to
> check #CSS? and if disabled due to the ATZ, re-set it, would that
> work?
I wonder if issuing ATZ is the right
On 25/07/17 13:05, Carlo Lobrano wrote:
> I can't reproduce this issue. I see the ATZ command, but I still receive
> each QSS notification.
OK. Do you have separate data and command ports? Is so, then perhaps
the reason which you can't reproduce the issue is that the ATZ command
only acts
On 25/07/17 16:46, Dan Williams wrote:
> There's a couple more things we could do with the disconnect code too.
>
> As you suggest, we could set AT by default and if the
> modem allows that, hope that dropping DTR does the right thing.
A potential problem here is badly implemented hardware where
On 25/07/17 10:24, Carlo Lobrano wrote:
> this is the patch to improve SIM hot swap error management in both AT
> and MBIM based modems :)
>
> The patch for GE910-QUAD is in thread "[PATCH] telit-plugin: ignore QSS
> when SIM-ME interface is locked"
Sorry for the misunderstanding - with that
Hi Carlo,
Thanks for the patch. It doesn't seem to be working here unfortunately.
It looks like AT+CSIM=1 is issued, but the corresponding AT+CSIM=0
command isn't, so the SIM is still locked for direct interaction, so
subsequent AT commands are getting SIM not present responses. It looks
like
On 24/07/17 18:24, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-07-24 at 18:09 +0100, Tim Small wrote:
>> I'm seeing an issue where the ppp connection exits, but the modem
>> seems
>> to be left in connected state (I can verify that by sending mm
>> SIGSTOP,
>> then openi
I'm seeing an issue where the ppp connection exits, but the modem seems
to be left in connected state (I can verify that by sending mm SIGSTOP,
then opening a serial terminal window - I'm able to then manually hangup
the modem using the +++ escape sequence).
Although it doesn't say so explicitly,
On 24/07/17 12:54, Carlo Lobrano wrote:
> Currently, when SIM hot swap fails in either mm-iface or plugin, the
> ModemManager still opens ports context and prints a message saying that
> SIM hot swap is supported and that it's waiting for SIM insertion,
> instead of clearly saying that SIM hot
On 20/07/17 17:26, Aleksander Morgado wrote:
> The AT+CSIM= command there timed out (it took longer than we expected
> it to take, a pity that these logs don't have timestamp), and then we
> issued ATE0, and we got the response of the previous AT+CSIM command
> back there. For this one maybe we
On 20/07/17 09:09, Carlo Lobrano wrote:
>
>> I think that the commands which mm issue causes it to close and reopen
>> the SIM and this takes longer than mm is giving it. How should I work
>> around this?
>
> This modem has an unsolicited signal (QSS) that shows the presence and
> status of the
Hello,
When probing a Telit GE910-QUAD (with a SIM inserted) mm always gives me
something like this in the debug logs:
ModemManager[26945]: (ttyUSB0) device open count is 2 (close)
ModemManager[26945]: (ttyUSB0): --> 'AT#QSS?'
ModemManager[26945]: (ttyUSB0): <-- ''
ModemManager[26945]:
On 04/07/17 09:58, Aleksander Morgado wrote:
> Given this is a pure RS232 device, there's not much "auto-probing" we
> can do, unless as Dan says there's a clear way to link both ports to
> the same "physical device" via udev properties or what not. Could you
> run udevadm info again using
Hello,
I'm trying to get a (GPRS / 2.5G) Telit GE910-Quad V3 working in CMUX
mode. There's only a single RS232 port connection between the modem and
the host computer, so I'd like to use GSM 27.010 ("CMUX") mode. The
Telit module does have another physical port, but there isn't a spare
UART on
27 matches
Mail list logo
