On Wed, 12 Jan 2022 at 19:24, Jérôme Pouiller
<jerome.pouiller@xxxxxxxxxx> 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
