Re: wwanX vs usbX

[Marcel Holtmann <marcel holtmann org>]

Hi Bjorn,

> is it so that ModemManager/NetworkManager require wwanX names for all 3G
> etc modem network interfaces?  If so, then I guess we have to add a new
> Huawei entry to cdc_ncm now that they have started using proper CDC NCM
> class codes.  From
> http://www.draisberghof.de/usb_modeswitch/bb/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1322 :
>
>     Interface Descriptor:
>       bLength                 9
>       bDescriptorType         4
>       bInterfaceNumber        2
>       bAlternateSetting       0
>       bNumEndpoints           1
>       bInterfaceClass         2 Communications
>       bInterfaceSubClass     13
>       bInterfaceProtocol      0
>       iInterface              0
>       CDC Header:
>         bcdCDC               1.10
>       UNRECOGNIZED CDC:  06 24 1a 00 01 1f
>       CDC Ethernet:
>         iMacAddress                      3 582C80139263
>         bmEthernetStatistics    0x00000005
>         wMaxSegmentSize               1514
>         wNumberMCFilters            0x0003
>         bNumberPowerFilters              1
>       CDC Union:
>         bMasterInterface        2
>         bSlaveInterface         2
>       Endpoint Descriptor:
>         bLength                 7
>         bDescriptorType         5
>         bEndpointAddress     0x83  EP 3 IN
>         bmAttributes            3
>           Transfer Type            Interrupt
>           Synch Type               None
>           Usage Type               Data
>         wMaxPacketSize     0x0040  1x 64 bytes
>         bInterval               5
>
>
> Putting naming policy in the kernel like this quite appalling, IMHO.
> Having device and vendor specific entries in the cdc_ncm and cdc_ether
> class drivers just because we need different kernel device names is
> completely unnecessary.

that is what we have the DEVTYPE=wwan value in the uevent sysfs entry
for. That is the one that needs to have the right value.

> I see the need to detect whether a device needs an external management
> channel or not. But this could have been handled much more elegantly by
> using the same logic MM applies when collecting all modem ports: If we
> find an associated management channel (AT serial port, QMI /dev/cdc-wdmX,
> MBIM /dev/cdc-wdmX or whatever), then this channel will manage the
> network device regardless of whether the name is usbX, ethX, wwanX or
> something else.  If there is no management channel then we can just as
> well assume that the device works without management.
>
> The current scheme is bad for several reasons:
> - requires otherwise unnecessary vendor/device specific entries in class
>   drivers,
> - vendor entries may erronously name non-managed devices as wwanX if the
>   same vendor makes both types of devices,
> - adding device specific entries will always lag behind compared to
>   class entries,
> - policies should be set in userspace
>
> Just my € .02

Matching by network interface names is a really bad idea. That is why I
added DEVTYPE support for WWAN, Wireless LAN, Bluetooth and WiMAX way
back then.

You also forget the simple fact that network interfaces can be just
renamed. And newer systemd version will do exactly that to achieve some
sort of persistent naming.

Regards

Marcel