Re: [PATCH] wireless: rt2x00: rt{2500,73}usb.c put back duplicate id

[Xose Vazquez Perez <xose.vazquez@gmail.com>]

On 04/17/2012 05:43 PM, Larry Finger wrote:
> On 04/17/2012 10:13 AM, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
>> On 04/14/2012 11:36 PM, Larry Finger wrote:
>>
>>> On 04/14/2012 04:00 PM, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
>>>> put back 0x050d,0x7050 to rt73usb, same usb_id for two chips:
>>>>
>>>> K7SF5D7050A ver 2xxx is rt2500
>>>> K7SF5D7050B ver 3xxx is rt73
>>>>
>>>> <http://en-us-support.belkin.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/297/kw/K7SF5D7050>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Xose Vazquez Perez<xose.vazquez@gmail.com>
>>
>>> I did a quick look at the rt2500 driver and did not see any code
>>> that detects what version chip is being read. If it is possible
>>> to determine if it is ver 2xxx and not 3xxx, then the probe
>>> routine should do that and return an error if the wrong driver
>>> is being loaded. A similar situation arises in the Realtek PCI
>>> devices. In that case, it is a PCI revision that allows a driver
>>> to reject the wrong hardware.
>>
>> This is just a patch to return to the original situation.
>> (0x050d, 0x7050) was deleted by commit
>> 08b8099c128d601fd675b212ef8b10397706b633
>> [1], and I was wrong.
>>
>> [1]<http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=08b8099c128d601fd675b212ef8b10397706b633>
>>
>
> You should not "fix" a mistake by making another. My position is that
> this should be done properly this time, otherwise users get devices that
> don't work merely because the wrong driver got loaded first. As long as
> there is some parameter available early in the load process that
> distinguishes the two devices, the probe routine needs to use it to
> avoid using the wrong driver.
>
> I don't have either of these devices, thus I cannot help in that part.

[old thread, lost on my Inbox]

Me too. I do not have any of these devices.

It should be done by someone with both devices.