Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 19 Mar 2019 13:43:58 +0100
From:   Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>
To:     =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=E5ns_Rullg=E5rd?= <mans@mansr.com>
Cc:     Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>,
        =?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F8rn?= Mork <bjorn@mork.no>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] USB: serial: option: set driver_info for SIM5218 and
 compatibles
Message-ID: <20190319124358.GK6124@localhost>
References: <20190226170710.12709-1-mans@mansr.com>
 <20190227083342.GJ4747@localhost>
 <yw1xpnrdv3z7.fsf@mansr.com>
 <20190227131315.GO4747@localhost>
 <yw1xlg21uwrp.fsf@mansr.com>
 <20190319102840.GI6124@localhost>
 <yw1xd0mn16ev.fsf@mansr.com>
 <20190319110819.GB3178@localhost>
 <yw1x8sxb125q.fsf@mansr.com>
 <20190319122719.GC3178@localhost>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20190319122719.GC3178@localhost>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 01:27:19PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 12:25:53PM +0000, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> > Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org> writes:
> > 
> > > On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 10:54:00AM +0000, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> > >> Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org> writes:
> > >
> > >> >> Regardless, setting the NCTRL flag should be harmless.
> > >> >
> > >> > Well, there are devices that depend on getting these requests, at least
> > >> > for the QMI interface. But we can always revert if anyone complains.
> > >> 
> > >> The QMI interface doesn't even pretend to be a uart.  The other ones do,
> > >> but there isn't actually any real uart behind them.  For instance, it
> > >> doesn't matter what baud rate one sets.
> > >
> > > Sure, but some devices still require "DTR" to be set for the QMI
> > > interface, so there not being any real uart is no guarantee that there
> > > is no firmware that expects these calls.
> > 
> > Now I'm thoroughly confused.  The QMI interface has a completely
> > separate driver that creates a network device (if I'm reading the code
> > correctly).
> 
> I was just giving an example of firmware sometimes doing unexpected
> things.

See 93725149794d ("net: qmi_wwan: MDM9x30 specific power management")
for some background.

Johan