Re: [PATCH] pl2303, visor: Match I330 phone more precisely

[Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>]

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 02:38:00PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 01:20:38PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 12:14:05PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> > > Samsung has just released a portable USB3 SSD, coming in a very small
> > > and nice form factor. It's USB ID is 04e8:8001, which unfortunately is
> > > already used by the pl2303 USB serial driver and the Palm Visor driver
> > > for the Samsung I330 phone cradle. Having pl2303 or visor pick up this
> > > device ID results in conflicts with the usb-storage driver, which
> > > handles the newly released portable USB3 SSD.
> > 
> > First of all, the device should not be claimed by both pl2303 and visor.
> > This predates the git, but it looks like the device id should simply be
> > removed from pl2303. Care to do that as a preparatory patch?
> 
> It was added back in 2004 in the 2.4.26 kernel release.  Petr Slansky
> asked me to add it, and sent a patch as he had the device.
> 
> But before that, back in 2003 Adam emailed saying that the visor driver
> worked with the device, and sent me a patch for it.  I didn't notice the
> duplicate ids for well over a decade now :(
>
> I'd bet this is really a pl2303 device, given that the visor driver was
> just a "dumb" pipe to the device and the pilot sync tools never cared
> about baud rates and the like, so odds are the visor entry should be
> removed.

My thinking was the other way around; that a dumb, generic device
(visor) would never work with a more specialised driver (pl2303).

The opposite could work though as the pl2303 setup commands would simply
fail, but the bulk in/out layout appears to be the same and should work
with a dumb device.

I double checked just now with a pl2303 HX device, and I can't seem to
get anything through with the default settings (visor or generic
driver) in loopback.

Note that there's another Samsung SPH-I500 Palm OS phone handled by
visor as well.

> Petr, do you still have this device?  Is it still really a pl2303
> device?

Let's see if we get some feedback first. But unless someone thinks my
reasoning above is flawed we could try removing it from pl2303 a little
later either way.

Thanks,
Johan