Re: Gobi 3000 (1199:901F)

On 01/09/2015 12:01 PM, Jeremy Moles wrote:
Hey everyone! I'm not entirely sure where else to ask this, and I'm somewhat desperate at this point having tried everything I'm capable of.

We have a machine here with the card listed in the subject. It shows up in lsusb as:

1199:901f Sierra Wireless, Inc.

It will work in Linux so far if--and ONLY IF--you boot into Windows first and then soft reboot into Linux. it appears that Windows does something to the modem that Linux (currently) does not, and I was wondering if anyone here had any advice on what I might try.

What I've done so far:

1) There is a knob in the sysfs hierarchy for this device that lets me change the "config" (or something like that, I'm actually working on this machine remotely and the customer isn't available right now!) from 1 to 0, or 0 to 1. This ends up being necessary in fact, as after doing so the tty's appear and the device is ready to be perturbed. It responds to ATI commands and whatnot, but again, won't work properly unless booted in Windows first. I should mention I found this knob entirely by accident while hacking on qcserial and trying to accept different "port" numbers as they enumerated themselves...

2) I downloaded the CodeAurora GobiSerial driver (which, according to the changelog has a fix for "powering on" a device) and modified it to work with 3.17 and 3.18 kernels (essentially, this involved re-exporting usb-serial.c symbols like usb_serial_probe the code relied on). However, I haven't had a chance to try this yet, and I'm not entirely convinced (after looking through the code) it really does anything qcserial doesn't.

Anyways, if anyone has any advice, please let us know!
networkmanager-list mailing list
networkmanager-list gnome org

I should also mention I JUST found this thread:

Which explains exactly what I was seeing when talking about my #1 attempt (the config option in sysfs; again, it's miraculously I found that at all).

I can't piece together everything the thread is talking about, but it may job someone's memory. I can also try e-mailing the author of that thread directly.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]