Re: MBIM Patch - Part 2 of 4

2016-06-01 Thread Martin Pieuchot
On 31/05/16(Tue) 13:08, Gerhard Roth wrote: > [...] > I'm quite sure this is a firmware bug and the only workaround I have > is the match by VID/PID. That still allows to match other MBIM devices > not listed in the table to be matched by Class/SubClass. I'd prefer if we could start like that,

Re: MBIM Patch - Part 2 of 4

2016-06-01 Thread Martin Pieuchot
On 31/05/16(Tue) 15:52, Gerhard Roth wrote: > On Mon, 23 May 2016 17:47:28 +0200 Martin Pieuchot wrote: > > On 23/05/16(Mon) 16:51, Gerhard Roth wrote: > > > On Mon, 23 May 2016 16:18:29 +0200 Martin Pieuchot > > > wrote: > > > > On 23/05/16(Mon) 15:38,

Re: MBIM Patch - Part 2 of 4

2016-05-31 Thread Theo de Raadt
> But using SIOCAIFADDR/SIOCDIFADDR seems rather awkward since in_control() > requires a 'struct socket *so' argument (even though it does nothing with > it, except checking 'so->so_state & SS_PRIV'). Creating a socket inside > the driver for this sole purpose seems just as weird as setting up a >

Re: MBIM Patch - Part 2 of 4

2016-05-31 Thread Gerhard Roth
On Mon, 23 May 2016 17:47:28 +0200 Martin Pieuchot wrote: > On 23/05/16(Mon) 16:51, Gerhard Roth wrote: > > On Mon, 23 May 2016 16:18:29 +0200 Martin Pieuchot wrote: > > > On 23/05/16(Mon) 15:38, Gerhard Roth wrote: > > > > > > This is crazy :) No driver

Re: MBIM Patch - Part 2 of 4

2016-05-31 Thread Gerhard Roth
On Mon, 23 May 2016 17:47:28 +0200 Martin Pieuchot wrote: > On 23/05/16(Mon) 16:51, Gerhard Roth wrote: > > On Mon, 23 May 2016 16:18:29 +0200 Martin Pieuchot wrote: > > > On 23/05/16(Mon) 15:38, Gerhard Roth wrote: > > > > This is part 2 of the MBIM patch. It

Re: MBIM Patch - Part 2 of 4

2016-05-23 Thread Gerhard Roth
On 23.05.2016 17:47, Martin Pieuchot wrote: On 23/05/16(Mon) 16:51, Gerhard Roth wrote: Why do you need to set a default route in the first place? Just like PPP this was designed as a point-to-point interface. The idea is that once you get an uplink, all traffic should be routed through it.

Re: MBIM Patch - Part 2 of 4

2016-05-23 Thread Martin Pieuchot
On 23/05/16(Mon) 16:40, Stuart Henderson wrote: > What I don't understand is why routing to a point-to-point interface needs > anything other than the interface name to be used for the destination. It doesn't really need anything else. At least not from the network stack point of view. Well I'm

Re: MBIM Patch - Part 2 of 4

2016-05-23 Thread Martin Pieuchot
On 23/05/16(Mon) 16:51, Gerhard Roth wrote: > On Mon, 23 May 2016 16:18:29 +0200 Martin Pieuchot wrote: > > On 23/05/16(Mon) 15:38, Gerhard Roth wrote: > > > This is part 2 of the MBIM patch. It adds the mbim driver to i386 > > > +/* > > > + * Some devices are picky about too

Re: MBIM Patch - Part 2 of 4

2016-05-23 Thread Theo de Raadt
> > Just like PPP this was designed as a point-to-point interface. The idea > > is that once you get an uplink, all traffic should be routed through it. > > > > What other sensible routing could there be? Only routing some selected IP > > addresses through your mobile uplink doesn't seem like the

Re: MBIM Patch - Part 2 of 4

2016-05-23 Thread Stuart Henderson
On 2016/05/23 16:51, Gerhard Roth wrote: > > This is the kind of horrors I have been removing during the past years. > > > > Why do you need to set a default route in the first place? > > Just like PPP this was designed as a point-to-point interface. The idea > is that once you get an uplink,

Re: MBIM Patch - Part 2 of 4

2016-05-23 Thread Theo de Raadt
> > Why is it better? This is just working around usb_probe_and_attach() > > and require developer to add an entry for every device we need to > > support. > > I just thought that some modules that are already in use say with a > umsm config would otherwise change to mbim and break the setup.

Re: MBIM Patch - Part 2 of 4

2016-05-23 Thread Gerhard Roth
On Mon, 23 May 2016 16:18:29 +0200 Martin Pieuchot wrote: > On 23/05/16(Mon) 15:38, Gerhard Roth wrote: > > This is part 2 of the MBIM patch. It adds the mbim driver to i386 > > Comments inline. Replies too. > > > Index: sys/dev/usb/if_mbim.c > >

Re: MBIM Patch - Part 2 of 4

2016-05-23 Thread Martin Pieuchot
On 23/05/16(Mon) 15:38, Gerhard Roth wrote: > This is part 2 of the MBIM patch. It adds the mbim driver to i386 Comments inline. > Index: sys/dev/usb/if_mbim.c > === > RCS file: sys/dev/usb/if_mbim.c > diff -N sys/dev/usb/if_mbim.c

MBIM Patch - Part 2 of 4

2016-05-23 Thread Gerhard Roth
This is part 2 of the MBIM patch. It adds the mbim driver to i386 and amd64 kernels. Index: sys/arch/amd64/conf/GENERIC === RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/arch/amd64/conf/GENERIC,v retrieving revision 1.418 diff -u -p -u -p -r1.418 GENERIC