On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 05:17:00PM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote:
>
> At 2021-08-16 17:04:00, "Reinhard Speyerer" <rspmn@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 11:54:04AM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote:
> >> Foxconn SDX55 T77W175 device is working in PCIe mode normally.
> >> You can find the PCIe support in drivers/bus/mhi/pci_generic.c file.
> >> But in some scenario, we need to capture the memory dump once it crashed.
> >> So a diag port under USB driver is needed.
> >>
> >> Only interface 0 is used:
> >> jbd@jbd-ThinkPad-P1-Gen-4:~$ lsusb | grep 05c6
> >> Bus 003 Device 010: ID 05c6:901d Qualcomm, Inc. Generic Mobile Broadband Adapter
> >> jbd@jbd-ThinkPad-P1-Gen-4:~$ lsusb -t | grep "Dev 10"
> >> |__ Port 7: Dev 10, If 0, Class=Vendor Specific Class, Driver=option, 480M
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Slark Xiao <slark_xiao@xxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/usb/serial/option.c | 1 +
> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/usb/serial/option.c b/drivers/usb/serial/option.c
> >> index 039450069ca4..c275f489c1cc 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/usb/serial/option.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/usb/serial/option.c
> >> @@ -2068,6 +2068,7 @@ static const struct usb_device_id option_ids[] = {
> >> .driver_info = RSVD(0) | RSVD(1) | RSVD(6) },
> >> { USB_DEVICE(0x0489, 0xe0b5), /* Foxconn T77W968 ESIM */
> >> .driver_info = RSVD(0) | RSVD(1) | RSVD(6) },
> >> + { USB_DEVICE(QUALCOMM_VENDOR_ID, 0x901d) }, /* Foxconn T77W175 PCIE+USB mode*/
> >> { USB_DEVICE(0x1508, 0x1001), /* Fibocom NL668 (IOT version) */
> >> .driver_info = RSVD(4) | RSVD(5) | RSVD(6) },
> >> { USB_DEVICE(0x2cb7, 0x0104), /* Fibocom NL678 series */
> >> --
> >> 2.25.1
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Hi Slark,
> >
> >since this entry uses the Qualcomm USB VID it would be a good idea to make
> >the option driver only bind to the DIAG interface in case other UE vendors
> >have the ADB interface provided by this composition enabled:
> > [...]
>
> Hi Reinhard,
> So should I use USB_DEVICE_INTERFACE_NUMBER(QUALCOMM_VENDOR_ID, 0x901d, 0x00) to bind Diag port only?
>
> Thanks
Hi Slark,
I think this would the preferred approach.
I'll let Johan advise on the preferred position of the new entry in the
device id table.
Regards,
Reinhard
