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

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

[Xose Vazquez Perez]

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>
---
 drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2500usb.c |    2 +-
 drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt73usb.c   |    1 +
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2500usb.c b/drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2500usb.c
index 1de9c75..c88fd3e 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2500usb.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2500usb.c
@@ -1912,7 +1912,7 @@ static struct usb_device_id rt2500usb_device_table[] = {
 	{ USB_DEVICE(0x0b05, 0x1706) },
 	{ USB_DEVICE(0x0b05, 0x1707) },
 	/* Belkin */
-	{ USB_DEVICE(0x050d, 0x7050) },
+	{ USB_DEVICE(0x050d, 0x7050) },	/* FCC ID: K7SF5D7050A ver. 2.x */
 	{ USB_DEVICE(0x050d, 0x7051) },
 	/* Cisco Systems */
 	{ USB_DEVICE(0x13b1, 0x000d) },
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt73usb.c b/drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt73usb.c
index e477a96..1551366 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt73usb.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt73usb.c
@@ -2412,6 +2412,7 @@ static struct usb_device_id rt73usb_device_table[] = {
 	{ USB_DEVICE(0x0b05, 0x1723) },
 	{ USB_DEVICE(0x0b05, 0x1724) },
 	/* Belkin */
+	{ USB_DEVICE(0x050d, 0x7050) },	/* FCC ID: K7SF5D7050B ver. 3.x */
 	{ USB_DEVICE(0x050d, 0x705a) },
 	{ USB_DEVICE(0x050d, 0x905b) },
 	{ USB_DEVICE(0x050d, 0x905c) },
-- 
1.7.6.5

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

[Larry Finger]

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.

Larry

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

[Xose Vazquez Perez]

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>

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

[Larry Finger]

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.

Larry

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

[Xose Vazquez Perez]

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.