2:20 p.m.
Hi
Increasingly a number of broadband connections require usb_modeswitch to
connect online
http://who-t.blogspot.com/2010/03/vodafone-australia-mobile-broadband-and...
Any opposition to adding this to the base group?
Rahul
2:27 p.m.
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 9:20 PM, Rahul Sundaram <metherid(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi
Increasingly a number of broadband connections require usb_modeswitch to
connect online
http://who-t.blogspot.com/2010/03/vodafone-australia-mobile-broadband-and...
Any opposition to adding this to the base group?
Well we could/should just make modemmanager to require it.
4:05 p.m.
On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 09:27:47PM +0100, drago01 wrote:
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 9:20 PM, Rahul Sundaram
<metherid(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> Increasingly a number of broadband connections require usb_modeswitch to
> connect online
>
> http://who-t.blogspot.com/2010/03/vodafone-australia-mobile-broadband-and...
>
> Any opposition to adding this to the base group?
Well we could/should just make modemmanager to require it.
We should wait until Bug 563503 is resolved. Version 1.1.0 has the udev
rules for plug-and-play magic, earlier versions still need to be invoked
manually. That's on top of the new device support 1.1.0 offers (including
the one that prompted me to write the post above).
Cheers,
Peter
10:02 a.m.
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 08:05 +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote:
On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 09:27:47PM +0100, drago01 wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 9:20 PM, Rahul Sundaram <metherid(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > Increasingly a number of broadband connections require usb_modeswitch to
> > connect online
> >
> > http://who-t.blogspot.com/2010/03/vodafone-australia-mobile-broadband-and...
> >
> > Any opposition to adding this to the base group?
>
> Well we could/should just make modemmanager to require it.
We should wait until Bug 563503 is resolved. Version 1.1.0 has the udev
rules for plug-and-play magic, earlier versions still need to be invoked
manually. That's on top of the new device support 1.1.0 offers (including
the one that prompted me to write the post above).
Honestly we should just build 1.1.0 for F11+.
Dan
10:44 a.m.
On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 01:50:21 +0530
Rahul Sundaram <metherid(a)gmail.com> wrote:
(adding linux-usb to cc:, see below)
Increasingly a number of broadband connections require usb_modeswitch
to
connect online
http://who-t.blogspot.com/2010/03/vodafone-australia-mobile-broadband-and...
Any opposition to adding this to the base group?
I am strongly opposed. IMHO, using usb_modeswitch is not necessary, and
we should not package its version 1.0.0 or any other version.
The root of the problem here is that someone thought it was a good idea
to make the kernel chase Huawei IDs. But it's not. Even if the linux-next
were taking the IDs as Huawei pops them, without any lag, the distro
kernels simply have no chance to keep up.
Here is the log from Peter's blog:
usb 1-2: new high speed USB device using ehci_hcd and address 6
usb 1-2: New USB device found, idVendor=12d1, idProduct=1520
usb 1-2: New USB device strings: Mfr=3, Product=2, SerialNumber=0
usb 1-2: Product: HUAWEI Mobile
usb 1-2: Manufacturer: HUAWEI Technology
So, the 0x1520. The 2.6.33 ends with 0x143f. No woder Peter resorts to
usb_modeswitch! And what's the downside for him? My ulcers?
We ought to put a quirk in usb-storage that deals with Huawei in a particular
way. I don't see how screenfuls of garbage in unusual_devs.h is any better
than special-casing in usb_stor_acquire_resources.
If we do not do that, users will continue using usb_modeswitch, and then
all the kernel code that deals with Huawei now amounts to useless waste.
-- Pete
11 a.m.
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 09:44 -0700, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 01:50:21 +0530
Rahul Sundaram <metherid(a)gmail.com> wrote:
(adding linux-usb to cc:, see below)
> Increasingly a number of broadband connections require usb_modeswitch to
> connect online
>
> http://who-t.blogspot.com/2010/03/vodafone-australia-mobile-broadband-and...
>
> Any opposition to adding this to the base group?
I am strongly opposed. IMHO, using usb_modeswitch is not necessary, and
we should not package its version 1.0.0 or any other version.
The root of the problem here is that someone thought it was a good idea
to make the kernel chase Huawei IDs. But it's not. Even if the linux-next
were taking the IDs as Huawei pops them, without any lag, the distro
kernels simply have no chance to keep up.
Yeah, that's a dead-end. usb_modeswitch is better here since it can be
update much more frequently.
Here is the log from Peter's blog:
usb 1-2: new high speed USB device using ehci_hcd and address 6
usb 1-2: New USB device found, idVendor=12d1, idProduct=1520
usb 1-2: New USB device strings: Mfr=3, Product=2, SerialNumber=0
usb 1-2: Product: HUAWEI Mobile
usb 1-2: Manufacturer: HUAWEI Technology
So, the 0x1520. The 2.6.33 ends with 0x143f. No woder Peter resorts to
usb_modeswitch! And what's the downside for him? My ulcers?
We ought to put a quirk in usb-storage that deals with Huawei in a particular
way. I don't see how screenfuls of garbage in unusual_devs.h is any better
than special-casing in usb_stor_acquire_resources.
If we do not do that, users will continue using usb_modeswitch, and then
all the kernel code that deals with Huawei now amounts to useless waste.
The problem is that there are a ton more devices that need modeswitching
than just Huawei, and upstream USB developers are refusing to take
patches that add more devices to the kernel modeswitching code because
they assert it should be done in userspace. Thus, usb_modeswitch is the
only thing that can handle *all* modems that need modeswitching these
days. Honestly we should just stop adding new Huawei IDs to
unusual_devs, and just use usb_modeswitch.
Dan
2:07 p.m.
On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 09:00:12 -0800
Dan Williams <dcbw(a)redhat.com> wrote:
The problem is that there are a ton more devices that need
modeswitching
than just Huawei, and upstream USB developers are refusing to take
patches that add more devices to the kernel modeswitching code because
they assert it should be done in userspace. Thus, usb_modeswitch is the
only thing that can handle *all* modems that need modeswitching these
days. Honestly we should just stop adding new Huawei IDs to
unusual_devs, and just use usb_modeswitch.
Who are these mysterious kernel developers? You don't happen to have
any e-mail saved?
If Greg Kroah rules that we should promote usb_modeswitch, then fine,
let's do that, and drop all Huawei nonsense from kernel. But I haven't
heard anything like that so far. In fact, the party line was exactly
the opposite: eradicate usb_modeswitch.
-- Pete
2:09 p.m.
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 13:07 -0700, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
> The problem is that there are a ton more devices that need
modeswitching
> than just Huawei, and upstream USB developers are refusing to take
> patches that add more devices to the kernel modeswitching code because
> they assert it should be done in userspace. Thus, usb_modeswitch is the
> only thing that can handle *all* modems that need modeswitching these
> days. Honestly we should just stop adding new Huawei IDs to
> unusual_devs, and just use usb_modeswitch.
Who are these mysterious kernel developers? You don't happen to have
any e-mail saved?
In fact, the party line was exactly
the opposite: eradicate usb_modeswitch.
if you're going to ask Dan for names and saved emails, presumably you
should provide the same :)
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net
5167
days inactive
5168
days old
7 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Adam Williamson -
Dan Williams -
drago01 -
Pete Zaitcev -
Peter Hutterer -
Rahul Sundaram