lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jan]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    Date
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v9 08/24] wfx: add bus_sdio.c
    On Wed, 12 Jan 2022 at 19:24, Jérôme Pouiller
    <jerome.pouiller@silabs.com> wrote:
    >
    > On Wednesday 12 January 2022 18:48:48 CET Pali Rohár wrote:
    > > CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
    > >
    > >
    > > On Wednesday 12 January 2022 17:45:45 Jérôme Pouiller wrote:
    > > > On Wednesday 12 January 2022 12:43:32 CET Pali Rohár wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > On Wednesday 12 January 2022 12:18:58 Jérôme Pouiller wrote:
    > > > > > On Wednesday 12 January 2022 11:58:59 CET Pali Rohár wrote:
    > > > > > > On Tuesday 11 January 2022 18:14:08 Jerome Pouiller wrote:
    > > > > > > > +static const struct sdio_device_id wfx_sdio_ids[] = {
    > > > > > > > + { SDIO_DEVICE(SDIO_VENDOR_ID_SILABS, SDIO_DEVICE_ID_SILABS_WF200) },
    > > > > > > > + { },
    > > > > > > > +};
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Hello! Is this table still required?
    > > > > >
    > > > > > As far as I understand, if the driver does not provide an id_table, the
    > > > > > probe function won't be never called (see sdio_match_device()).
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Since, we rely on the device tree, we could replace SDIO_VENDOR_ID_SILABS
    > > > > > and SDIO_DEVICE_ID_SILABS_WF200 by SDIO_ANY_ID. However, it does not hurt
    > > > > > to add an extra filter here.
    > > > >
    > > > > Now when this particular id is not required, I'm thinking if it is still
    > > > > required and it is a good idea to define these SDIO_VENDOR_ID_SILABS
    > > > > macros into kernel include files. As it would mean that other broken
    > > > > SDIO devices could define these bogus numbers too... And having them in
    > > > > common kernel includes files can cause issues... e.g. other developers
    > > > > could think that it is correct to use them as they are defined in common
    > > > > header files. But as these numbers are not reliable (other broken cards
    > > > > may have same ids as wf200) and their usage may cause issues in future.
    > > >
    > > > In order to make SDIO_VENDOR_ID_SILABS less official, do you prefer to
    > > > define it in wfx/bus_sdio.c instead of mmc/sdio_ids.h?
    > > >
    > > > Or even not defined at all like:
    > > >
    > > > static const struct sdio_device_id wfx_sdio_ids[] = {
    > > > /* WF200 does not have official VID/PID */
    > > > { SDIO_DEVICE(0x0000, 0x1000) },
    > > > { },
    > > > };
    > >
    > > This has advantage that it is explicitly visible that this device does
    > > not use any officially assigned ids.
    >
    > Ulf, are you also agree?

    Sure, that works for me too.

    Kind regards
    Uffe

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2022-01-13 13:09    [W:3.385 / U:1.144 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site