| Message ID | 20221101021052.7532-1-slark_xiao@163.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v3] PCI: Add vendor ID for QUECTEL | expand |
On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 10:10:52AM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote: > n MHI driver, there are some companies' product still do not have their > own PCI vendor macro. So we add it here to make the code neat. Ref ID > could be found in link https://pcisig.com/membership/member-companies. > > Signed-off-by: Slark Xiao <slark_xiao@163.com> > --- > v3: Separate different vendors into different patch. > > v2: Update vendor ID to the right location sorted by numeric value. > --- > drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c | 6 +++--- > include/linux/pci_ids.h | 2 ++ > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c b/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c > index caa4ce28cf9e..81ae9c49ce2a 100644 > --- a/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c > +++ b/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c > @@ -555,11 +555,11 @@ static const struct pci_device_id mhi_pci_id_table[] = { > .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_telit_fn990_info }, > { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QCOM, 0x0308), > .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_qcom_sdx65_info }, > - { PCI_DEVICE(0x1eac, 0x1001), /* EM120R-GL (sdx24) */ > + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL, 0x1001), /* EM120R-GL (sdx24) */ > .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_quectel_em1xx_info }, > - { PCI_DEVICE(0x1eac, 0x1002), /* EM160R-GL (sdx24) */ > + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL, 0x1002), /* EM160R-GL (sdx24) */ > .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_quectel_em1xx_info }, > - { PCI_DEVICE(0x1eac, 0x2001), /* EM120R-GL for FCCL (sdx24) */ > + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL, 0x2001), /* EM120R-GL for FCCL (sdx24) */ > .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_quectel_em1xx_info }, > /* T99W175 (sdx55), Both for eSIM and Non-eSIM */ > { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_FOXCONN, 0xe0ab), > diff --git a/include/linux/pci_ids.h b/include/linux/pci_ids.h > index b362d90eb9b0..3c91461bcfe4 100644 > --- a/include/linux/pci_ids.h > +++ b/include/linux/pci_ids.h > @@ -2585,6 +2585,8 @@ > #define PCI_VENDOR_ID_TEKRAM 0x1de1 > #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_TEKRAM_DC290 0xdc29 > > +#define PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL 0x1eac Why did you ignore the comment at the top of this file saying that new entries are not needed to be added, especially for just one user? thanks, greg k-h
At 2022-11-01 12:46:19, "Greg KH" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 10:10:52AM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote: >> n MHI driver, there are some companies' product still do not have their >> own PCI vendor macro. So we add it here to make the code neat. Ref ID >> could be found in link https://pcisig.com/membership/member-companies. >> >> Signed-off-by: Slark Xiao <slark_xiao@163.com> >> --- >> v3: Separate different vendors into different patch. >> >> v2: Update vendor ID to the right location sorted by numeric value. >> --- >> drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c | 6 +++--- >> include/linux/pci_ids.h | 2 ++ >> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c b/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c >> index caa4ce28cf9e..81ae9c49ce2a 100644 >> --- a/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c >> +++ b/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c >> @@ -555,11 +555,11 @@ static const struct pci_device_id mhi_pci_id_table[] = { >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_telit_fn990_info }, >> { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QCOM, 0x0308), >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_qcom_sdx65_info }, >> - { PCI_DEVICE(0x1eac, 0x1001), /* EM120R-GL (sdx24) */ >> + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL, 0x1001), /* EM120R-GL (sdx24) */ >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_quectel_em1xx_info }, >> - { PCI_DEVICE(0x1eac, 0x1002), /* EM160R-GL (sdx24) */ >> + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL, 0x1002), /* EM160R-GL (sdx24) */ >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_quectel_em1xx_info }, >> - { PCI_DEVICE(0x1eac, 0x2001), /* EM120R-GL for FCCL (sdx24) */ >> + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL, 0x2001), /* EM120R-GL for FCCL (sdx24) */ >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_quectel_em1xx_info }, >> /* T99W175 (sdx55), Both for eSIM and Non-eSIM */ >> { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_FOXCONN, 0xe0ab), >> diff --git a/include/linux/pci_ids.h b/include/linux/pci_ids.h >> index b362d90eb9b0..3c91461bcfe4 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/pci_ids.h >> +++ b/include/linux/pci_ids.h >> @@ -2585,6 +2585,8 @@ >> #define PCI_VENDOR_ID_TEKRAM 0x1de1 >> #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_TEKRAM_DC290 0xdc29 >> >> +#define PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL 0x1eac > >Why did you ignore the comment at the top of this file saying that new >entries are not needed to be added, especially for just one user? > >thanks, > >greg k-h Hi Greg, Actually I didn't see this notice before committing this patch. I even discussed it with the maintainer for several times and nobody show me this rule. I have a concern, some IOT module vendors, like QUECTEL, CINTERION(THALES), SIERRA,ROLLING and so on, they only produce IOT modules without other hardware with PCIe interface, and they applied for their own VID. But they can't get a their own VENDOR MARCO? This seems unreasonable. This change should be harmless and make the code neat. This is my opinion. Thanks Slark Xiao
On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 02:09:57PM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At 2022-11-01 12:46:19, "Greg KH" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 10:10:52AM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote: > >> n MHI driver, there are some companies' product still do not have their > >> own PCI vendor macro. So we add it here to make the code neat. Ref ID > >> could be found in link https://pcisig.com/membership/member-companies. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Slark Xiao <slark_xiao@163.com> > >> --- > >> v3: Separate different vendors into different patch. > >> > >> v2: Update vendor ID to the right location sorted by numeric value. > >> --- > >> drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c | 6 +++--- > >> include/linux/pci_ids.h | 2 ++ > >> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c b/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c > >> index caa4ce28cf9e..81ae9c49ce2a 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c > >> +++ b/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c > >> @@ -555,11 +555,11 @@ static const struct pci_device_id mhi_pci_id_table[] = { > >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_telit_fn990_info }, > >> { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QCOM, 0x0308), > >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_qcom_sdx65_info }, > >> - { PCI_DEVICE(0x1eac, 0x1001), /* EM120R-GL (sdx24) */ > >> + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL, 0x1001), /* EM120R-GL (sdx24) */ > >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_quectel_em1xx_info }, > >> - { PCI_DEVICE(0x1eac, 0x1002), /* EM160R-GL (sdx24) */ > >> + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL, 0x1002), /* EM160R-GL (sdx24) */ > >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_quectel_em1xx_info }, > >> - { PCI_DEVICE(0x1eac, 0x2001), /* EM120R-GL for FCCL (sdx24) */ > >> + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL, 0x2001), /* EM120R-GL for FCCL (sdx24) */ > >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_quectel_em1xx_info }, > >> /* T99W175 (sdx55), Both for eSIM and Non-eSIM */ > >> { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_FOXCONN, 0xe0ab), > >> diff --git a/include/linux/pci_ids.h b/include/linux/pci_ids.h > >> index b362d90eb9b0..3c91461bcfe4 100644 > >> --- a/include/linux/pci_ids.h > >> +++ b/include/linux/pci_ids.h > >> @@ -2585,6 +2585,8 @@ > >> #define PCI_VENDOR_ID_TEKRAM 0x1de1 > >> #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_TEKRAM_DC290 0xdc29 > >> > >> +#define PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL 0x1eac > > > >Why did you ignore the comment at the top of this file saying that new > >entries are not needed to be added, especially for just one user? > > > >thanks, > > > >greg k-h > Hi Greg, > Actually I didn't see this notice before committing this patch. I even discussed > it with the maintainer for several times and nobody show me this rule. > I have a concern, some IOT module vendors, like QUECTEL, CINTERION(THALES), > SIERRA,ROLLING and so on, they only produce IOT modules without other > hardware with PCIe interface, and they applied for their own VID. But they > can't get a their own VENDOR MARCO? This seems unreasonable. > This change should be harmless and make the code neat. > This is my opinion. It causes a _LOT_ of churn and merge issues when everyone is adding new entries to a single file. Which is why, 15+ years ago, we made the decision that if a vendor or device id is only needed in one file, then it should not be added to the pci_ids.h file. No need to change that now, please just put the vendor id in the single driver that it is needed in. thanks, greg k-h
At 2022-11-01 14:24:58, "Greg KH" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 02:09:57PM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote: >> >> >> At 2022-11-01 12:46:19, "Greg KH" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >> >On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 10:10:52AM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote: >> >> n MHI driver, there are some companies' product still do not have their >> >> own PCI vendor macro. So we add it here to make the code neat. Ref ID >> >> could be found in link https://pcisig.com/membership/member-companies. >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Slark Xiao <slark_xiao@163.com> >> >> --- >> >> v3: Separate different vendors into different patch. >> >> >> >> v2: Update vendor ID to the right location sorted by numeric value. >> >> --- >> >> drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c | 6 +++--- >> >> include/linux/pci_ids.h | 2 ++ >> >> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> >> >> diff --git a/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c b/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c >> >> index caa4ce28cf9e..81ae9c49ce2a 100644 >> >> --- a/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c >> >> +++ b/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c >> >> @@ -555,11 +555,11 @@ static const struct pci_device_id mhi_pci_id_table[] = { >> >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_telit_fn990_info }, >> >> { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QCOM, 0x0308), >> >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_qcom_sdx65_info }, >> >> - { PCI_DEVICE(0x1eac, 0x1001), /* EM120R-GL (sdx24) */ >> >> + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL, 0x1001), /* EM120R-GL (sdx24) */ >> >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_quectel_em1xx_info }, >> >> - { PCI_DEVICE(0x1eac, 0x1002), /* EM160R-GL (sdx24) */ >> >> + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL, 0x1002), /* EM160R-GL (sdx24) */ >> >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_quectel_em1xx_info }, >> >> - { PCI_DEVICE(0x1eac, 0x2001), /* EM120R-GL for FCCL (sdx24) */ >> >> + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL, 0x2001), /* EM120R-GL for FCCL (sdx24) */ >> >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_quectel_em1xx_info }, >> >> /* T99W175 (sdx55), Both for eSIM and Non-eSIM */ >> >> { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_FOXCONN, 0xe0ab), >> >> diff --git a/include/linux/pci_ids.h b/include/linux/pci_ids.h >> >> index b362d90eb9b0..3c91461bcfe4 100644 >> >> --- a/include/linux/pci_ids.h >> >> +++ b/include/linux/pci_ids.h >> >> @@ -2585,6 +2585,8 @@ >> >> #define PCI_VENDOR_ID_TEKRAM 0x1de1 >> >> #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_TEKRAM_DC290 0xdc29 >> >> >> >> +#define PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL 0x1eac >> > >> >Why did you ignore the comment at the top of this file saying that new >> >entries are not needed to be added, especially for just one user? >> > >> >thanks, >> > >> >greg k-h >> Hi Greg, >> Actually I didn't see this notice before committing this patch. I even discussed >> it with the maintainer for several times and nobody show me this rule. >> I have a concern, some IOT module vendors, like QUECTEL, CINTERION(THALES), >> SIERRA,ROLLING and so on, they only produce IOT modules without other >> hardware with PCIe interface, and they applied for their own VID. But they >> can't get a their own VENDOR MARCO? This seems unreasonable. >> This change should be harmless and make the code neat. >> This is my opinion. > >It causes a _LOT_ of churn and merge issues when everyone is adding new >entries to a single file. Which is why, 15+ years ago, we made the >decision that if a vendor or device id is only needed in one file, then >it should not be added to the pci_ids.h file. > >No need to change that now, please just put the vendor id in the single >driver that it is needed in. > >thanks, > >greg k-h Hi Greg, Thanks for your explanation. Hi Mani, Is there a need to update these vendor ids as macro in pci_generic.c? Thanks.
On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 02:52:45PM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote: > > > > > > At 2022-11-01 14:24:58, "Greg KH" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 02:09:57PM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote: > >> > >> > >> At 2022-11-01 12:46:19, "Greg KH" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> >On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 10:10:52AM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote: > >> >> n MHI driver, there are some companies' product still do not have their > >> >> own PCI vendor macro. So we add it here to make the code neat. Ref ID > >> >> could be found in link https://pcisig.com/membership/member-companies. > >> >> > >> >> Signed-off-by: Slark Xiao <slark_xiao@163.com> > >> >> --- > >> >> v3: Separate different vendors into different patch. > >> >> > >> >> v2: Update vendor ID to the right location sorted by numeric value. > >> >> --- > >> >> drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c | 6 +++--- > >> >> include/linux/pci_ids.h | 2 ++ > >> >> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > >> >> > >> >> diff --git a/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c b/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c > >> >> index caa4ce28cf9e..81ae9c49ce2a 100644 > >> >> --- a/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c > >> >> +++ b/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c > >> >> @@ -555,11 +555,11 @@ static const struct pci_device_id mhi_pci_id_table[] = { > >> >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_telit_fn990_info }, > >> >> { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QCOM, 0x0308), > >> >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_qcom_sdx65_info }, > >> >> - { PCI_DEVICE(0x1eac, 0x1001), /* EM120R-GL (sdx24) */ > >> >> + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL, 0x1001), /* EM120R-GL (sdx24) */ > >> >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_quectel_em1xx_info }, > >> >> - { PCI_DEVICE(0x1eac, 0x1002), /* EM160R-GL (sdx24) */ > >> >> + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL, 0x1002), /* EM160R-GL (sdx24) */ > >> >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_quectel_em1xx_info }, > >> >> - { PCI_DEVICE(0x1eac, 0x2001), /* EM120R-GL for FCCL (sdx24) */ > >> >> + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL, 0x2001), /* EM120R-GL for FCCL (sdx24) */ > >> >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_quectel_em1xx_info }, > >> >> /* T99W175 (sdx55), Both for eSIM and Non-eSIM */ > >> >> { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_FOXCONN, 0xe0ab), > >> >> diff --git a/include/linux/pci_ids.h b/include/linux/pci_ids.h > >> >> index b362d90eb9b0..3c91461bcfe4 100644 > >> >> --- a/include/linux/pci_ids.h > >> >> +++ b/include/linux/pci_ids.h > >> >> @@ -2585,6 +2585,8 @@ > >> >> #define PCI_VENDOR_ID_TEKRAM 0x1de1 > >> >> #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_TEKRAM_DC290 0xdc29 > >> >> > >> >> +#define PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL 0x1eac > >> > > >> >Why did you ignore the comment at the top of this file saying that new > >> >entries are not needed to be added, especially for just one user? > >> > > >> >thanks, > >> > > >> >greg k-h > >> Hi Greg, > >> Actually I didn't see this notice before committing this patch. I even discussed > >> it with the maintainer for several times and nobody show me this rule. > >> I have a concern, some IOT module vendors, like QUECTEL, CINTERION(THALES), > >> SIERRA,ROLLING and so on, they only produce IOT modules without other > >> hardware with PCIe interface, and they applied for their own VID. But they > >> can't get a their own VENDOR MARCO? This seems unreasonable. > >> This change should be harmless and make the code neat. > >> This is my opinion. > > > >It causes a _LOT_ of churn and merge issues when everyone is adding new > >entries to a single file. Which is why, 15+ years ago, we made the > >decision that if a vendor or device id is only needed in one file, then > >it should not be added to the pci_ids.h file. > > > >No need to change that now, please just put the vendor id in the single > >driver that it is needed in. > > > >thanks, > > > >greg k-h > Hi Greg, > Thanks for your explanation. > > Hi Mani, > Is there a need to update these vendor ids as macro in > pci_generic.c? > It is not really needed but for convenience you could add a macro in pci_generic.c itself. Thanks, Mani > Thanks.
On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 02:09:57PM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote: > At 2022-11-01 12:46:19, "Greg KH" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 10:10:52AM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote: > >> n MHI driver, there are some companies' product still do not have their > >> own PCI vendor macro. So we add it here to make the code neat. Ref ID > >> could be found in link https://pcisig.com/membership/member-companies. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Slark Xiao <slark_xiao@163.com> > >> --- > >> v3: Separate different vendors into different patch. > >> > >> v2: Update vendor ID to the right location sorted by numeric value. > >> --- > >> drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c | 6 +++--- > >> include/linux/pci_ids.h | 2 ++ > >> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c b/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c > >> index caa4ce28cf9e..81ae9c49ce2a 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c > >> +++ b/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c > >> @@ -555,11 +555,11 @@ static const struct pci_device_id mhi_pci_id_table[] = { > >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_telit_fn990_info }, > >> { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QCOM, 0x0308), > >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_qcom_sdx65_info }, > >> - { PCI_DEVICE(0x1eac, 0x1001), /* EM120R-GL (sdx24) */ > >> + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL, 0x1001), /* EM120R-GL (sdx24) */ > >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_quectel_em1xx_info }, > >> - { PCI_DEVICE(0x1eac, 0x1002), /* EM160R-GL (sdx24) */ > >> + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL, 0x1002), /* EM160R-GL (sdx24) */ > >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_quectel_em1xx_info }, > >> - { PCI_DEVICE(0x1eac, 0x2001), /* EM120R-GL for FCCL (sdx24) */ > >> + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL, 0x2001), /* EM120R-GL for FCCL (sdx24) */ > >> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_quectel_em1xx_info }, > >> /* T99W175 (sdx55), Both for eSIM and Non-eSIM */ > >> { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_FOXCONN, 0xe0ab), > >> diff --git a/include/linux/pci_ids.h b/include/linux/pci_ids.h > >> index b362d90eb9b0..3c91461bcfe4 100644 > >> --- a/include/linux/pci_ids.h > >> +++ b/include/linux/pci_ids.h > >> @@ -2585,6 +2585,8 @@ > >> #define PCI_VENDOR_ID_TEKRAM 0x1de1 > >> #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_TEKRAM_DC290 0xdc29 > >> > >> +#define PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL 0x1eac > > > >Why did you ignore the comment at the top of this file saying that new > >entries are not needed to be added, especially for just one user? > > Actually I didn't see this notice before committing this patch. I even discussed > it with the maintainer for several times and nobody show me this rule. > I have a concern, some IOT module vendors, like QUECTEL, CINTERION(THALES), > SIERRA,ROLLING and so on, they only produce IOT modules without other > hardware with PCIe interface, and they applied for their own VID. But they > can't get a their own VENDOR MARCO? This seems unreasonable. > This change should be harmless and make the code neat. > This is my opinion. Sorry, this is my fault. I have merged or acked several vendor ID additions recently, but I don't really backport changes like Greg does, so I'm not as sensitized to the churn and merge issues. Bjorn
diff --git a/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c b/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c index caa4ce28cf9e..81ae9c49ce2a 100644 --- a/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c +++ b/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c @@ -555,11 +555,11 @@ static const struct pci_device_id mhi_pci_id_table[] = { .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_telit_fn990_info }, { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QCOM, 0x0308), .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_qcom_sdx65_info }, - { PCI_DEVICE(0x1eac, 0x1001), /* EM120R-GL (sdx24) */ + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL, 0x1001), /* EM120R-GL (sdx24) */ .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_quectel_em1xx_info }, - { PCI_DEVICE(0x1eac, 0x1002), /* EM160R-GL (sdx24) */ + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL, 0x1002), /* EM160R-GL (sdx24) */ .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_quectel_em1xx_info }, - { PCI_DEVICE(0x1eac, 0x2001), /* EM120R-GL for FCCL (sdx24) */ + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL, 0x2001), /* EM120R-GL for FCCL (sdx24) */ .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t) &mhi_quectel_em1xx_info }, /* T99W175 (sdx55), Both for eSIM and Non-eSIM */ { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_FOXCONN, 0xe0ab), diff --git a/include/linux/pci_ids.h b/include/linux/pci_ids.h index b362d90eb9b0..3c91461bcfe4 100644 --- a/include/linux/pci_ids.h +++ b/include/linux/pci_ids.h @@ -2585,6 +2585,8 @@ #define PCI_VENDOR_ID_TEKRAM 0x1de1 #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_TEKRAM_DC290 0xdc29 +#define PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL 0x1eac + #define PCI_VENDOR_ID_TEHUTI 0x1fc9 #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_TEHUTI_3009 0x3009 #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_TEHUTI_3010 0x3010
n MHI driver, there are some companies' product still do not have their own PCI vendor macro. So we add it here to make the code neat. Ref ID could be found in link https://pcisig.com/membership/member-companies. Signed-off-by: Slark Xiao <slark_xiao@163.com> --- v3: Separate different vendors into different patch. v2: Update vendor ID to the right location sorted by numeric value. --- drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c | 6 +++--- include/linux/pci_ids.h | 2 ++ 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)