[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210209081744.43eea7b5@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2021 08:17:44 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Aleksander Morgado <aleksander@...ksander.es>
Cc: Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@...aro.org>,
Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@...eaurora.org>,
Bhaumik Bhatt <bbhatt@...eaurora.org>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v18 0/3] userspace MHI client interface driver
On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 10:20:30 +0100 Aleksander Morgado wrote:
> This may be a stupid suggestion, but would the integration look less a
> backdoor if it would have been named "mhi_wwan" and it exposed already
> all the AT+DIAG+QMI+MBIM+NMEA possible channels as chardevs, not just
> QMI?
What's DIAG? Who's going to remember that this is a backdoor driver
a year from now when Qualcomm sends a one liner patches which just
adds a single ID to open another channel?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists