Added software@xxxxxxxxxx to CC ( I found this email on google). Best regards, Maxim Levitsky On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 10:53 PM Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > +Cc: more Aya-Neo emails (please, share it with your legal, involved managers > and engineers). > > On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 09:05:25PM +0200, Maxim Levitsky wrote: > > > Any news from Aya-Neo? Have you fixed and issued a new firmware, please? > > > > Nothing I heard of. Anything I can do to further help with this? > > Unfortunately we need to hear from the Aya-Neo, if they ever care about their > products. Without that it would make an unfortunate precedent which will open > a Pandora's box (means a green light on abusing ACPI specification and other's > IPs, yes, Intellectual Property in this case, as ID is an IP of the corresponding > vendor). > > I'm fine if Realtek doesn't care about their IDs to be (ab)used by somebody else, > the main problem here is on Aya-Neo side. > > Is there any engineer-to-engineer connection with Aya-Neo? Because using that > info@ address may be simply ignored / went to spam / etc. > > > On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 7:50 PM Andy Shevchenko > > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > I filed the form, Cc'ed this to more people from Realtek, still no response on > > > the topic. Does Realtek really cares about their IDs? > > > > > > Any news from Aya-Neo? Have you fixed and issued a new firmware, please? > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 02:21:04PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > +Cc: another set of emails from Realtek as per Hayes' email. > > > > > > > > Please waterfall to the people inside Realtek who can answer the question. > > > > (Note, you may access this discussion in full via: > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iio/CACAwPwYQHRcrabw9=0tvenPzAcwwW1pTaR6a+AEWBF9Hqf_wXQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#u) > > > > > > > > The problem here is to have an official confirmation of what 10ec:5280 > > > > ID is from Realtek's point of view. > > > > > > > > Context: the current discussion and a patch state that it's related > > > > to gyro sensor. Is it so? > > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 10:36:12AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > > On Wednesday, October 20, 2021, Hayes Wang <hayeswang@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2021 5:59 PM > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > Realtek probably should make this ID marked somehow broken and not > > > > > > use > > > > > > > > > in their products in case the answer to the first of the above > > > > > > question > > > > > > > > > is "yes". (Of course in case the ID will be used for solely PCI > > > > > > enumerated > > > > > > > > > product there will be no conflict, I just propose to be on the > > > > > > safest side, > > > > > > > > > but remark should be made somewhere). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any comments from Realtek, please? > > > > > > > > > > > > Excuse me. I don't know this device, so I don't know who I could forward. > > > > > > Maybe you could try our contract window from our web site. > > > > > > https://www.realtek.com/en/cu-1-en/cu-1-taiwan-en > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for reply. I will try my best, but I am afraid that what you suggest > > > > > will be a long loop (and I believe the people behind that form are not > > > > > technical, they probably won’t understand the topic). I think you may pull > > > > > strings inside much faster. Just ask somebody who is technical superior in > > > > > your team / organization. Ideally inside company you may have a dedicated > > > > > people who responsible for allocating PCI and ACPI IDs. > > -- > With Best Regards, > Andy Shevchenko > >
