Re:Re: [PATCH v2] PCI: Add vendor ID for Quectel and Cinterion

["Slark Xiao" <slark_xiao@163.com>]

At 2022-10-29 00:06:21, "Bjorn Helgaas" <helgaas@kernel.org> wrote:
>On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 10:37:11AM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote:
>> In 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
>>  and https://pciids.sourceforge.net/pci.ids . Thales use Cinterion as
>> their IOT modem card's trademark. So you will find 0x1269 belongs to
>> Thales. Actually, Cinterion belongs to Gemalto, and Gemalto belongs to
>>  Thales.
>
>There should not be spaces at the beginning of these lines.
>
>Don't bother with the sourceforge URL; I don't think that's really
>useful here.
 The space issue will be fixed in next patch.
>
>> Signed-off-by: Slark Xiao <slark_xiao@163.com>
>> ---
>>  include/linux/pci_ids.h | 4 ++++
>>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>> 
>> diff --git a/include/linux/pci_ids.h b/include/linux/pci_ids.h
>> index b362d90eb9b0..9e2b6286f53f 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/pci_ids.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/pci_ids.h
>> @@ -1765,6 +1765,8 @@
>>  #define PCI_VENDOR_ID_SATSAGEM		0x1267
>>  #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_SATSAGEM_NICCY	0x1016
>>  
>> +#define PCI_VENDOR_ID_CINTERION		0x1269	/* Celluar Modules*/
>
>This should identify the *vendor*, not a trademark for a specific
>product line.  And it should correspond somehow with the PCI-SIG
>registration.  So I think PCI_VENDOR_ID_THALES would be more
>appropriate here.
>
Yeah, currently it's used by IOT modules which support PCIE. But we
can't know if they will use this VID for other non-IOT modules product.
Thales would be better.

>I think the best thing here would be two patches.  One patch would add
>PCI_VENDOR_ID_THALES to pci_ids.h and also add a use of it in the MHI
>driver.  The second patch would do the same for PCI_VENDOR_ID_QUECTEL.
>
>Then each one is logically self-contained.
I must make sure these ids are applied, then I could commit the changes in MHI
driver side. Otherwise it will cause build error.
So I combine QUECTEL with THALES as a single patch. Shall I separate it from
each other? 1 for PCI IDs, and another for MHI change. It would be better, I think.
>
>>  #define PCI_VENDOR_ID_ENSONIQ		0x1274
>>  #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_ENSONIQ_CT5880	0x5880
>>  #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_ENSONIQ_ES1370	0x5000
>> @@ -2585,6 +2587,8 @@
>>  #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
>> -- 
>> 2.34.1
>>