On 6/3/19 9:54 AM, Dan Williams wrote: >> To be perfectly honest, at first I thought having IPA use rmnet >> was a cargo cult thing like Dan suggested, because I didn't see > To be clear I only meant cargo-culting the naming, not any > functionality. Clearly IPA/rmnet/QMAP are pretty intimately connected > at this point. But this goes back to whether IPA needs a netdev itself > or whether you need an rmnet device created on top. If the former then > I'd say no cargo-culting, if the later then it's a moot point because > the device name will be rmnet%d anyway. OK I thought you weren't sure why rmnet was a layer at all. As I said, I didn't have a very good understanding of why it was even needed when I first started working on this. I can't (or won't) comment right now on whether IPA needs its own netdev for rmnet to use. The IPA endpoints used for the modem network interfaces are enabled when the netdev is opened and disabled when closed. Outside of that, TX and RX are pretty much immediately passed through to the layer below or above. IPA currently has no other net device operations. -Alex
