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

From: Slark Xiao
Date: Mon Oct 31 2022 - 05:08:59 EST


















At 2022-10-29 00:06:21, "Bjorn Helgaas" <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> 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
>>