Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755890AbZAVInk (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jan 2009 03:43:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750981AbZAVIn3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jan 2009 03:43:29 -0500 Received: from smtp05.msg.oleane.net ([62.161.4.5]:47829 "EHLO smtp05.msg.oleane.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750788AbZAVIn2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jan 2009 03:43:28 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 1305 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Thu, 22 Jan 2009 03:43:28 EST X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.7.2 smtp05.msg.oleane.net n0M8LKu7026215 Authentication-Results: smtp05.msg.oleane.net; dkim=none (no signature) header.i=unknown; dkim-adsp=none X-Oleane-Rep: REPA From: "Tosoni" To: "'Michael Bramer'" , "'Alan Cox'" Cc: "'Niels de Vos'" , "'Paulius Zaleckas'" , , Subject: RE: [PATCH] drivers/serial/8250_pci.c (add support for '8-port RS-232 MIC-3620 from advantech' Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 09:21:17 +0100 Message-ID: <6E0880DF84464BF2AA0275ABFFCCDAF2@acksys.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 In-Reply-To: <20090121234241.GB10645@deb-support.de> Importance: Normal X-Spam-Flag: NO X-PMX-Spam: Probability=8% X-PFSI-Info: PMX 5.5.0.356843, Antispam-Engine: 2.6.1.350677, Antispam-Data: 2009.1.22.80149 (no antivirus check) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1291 Lines: 35 > [mailto:linux-serial-owner@vger.kernel.org]On Behalf Of Michael Bramer > > On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 12:32:15PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > > > >> static struct pci_device_id serial_pci_tbl[] = { > > > >> + { PCI_VENDOR_ID_ADVANTECH, > PCI_DEVICE_ID_ADVANTECH_PCI3620, > > > >> + 0x3620, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, > > > > > > Why not use PCI_VENDOR_ID_ADVANTECH as PCI_SUBVENDOR_ID too? > > > > The Advantech vendor id is not 0x3620. This confused me as > well which is > > why I asked for an lspci. Advantech has stuck the device id in the > > subvendor bits and '1' in the subdevice (so it should be 1 not > > PCI_ANY_ID). > > is this better? > > + { PCI_VENDOR_ID_ADVANTECH, > PCI_DEVICE_ID_ADVANTECH_PCI3620, > + PCI_DEVICE_ID_ADVANTECH_PCI3620, 1, 0, 0, Since the name describes a device id where it should be a (sub)vendor id, I would suggest that you add a line of comment to explain the case. So that no one will be tempted to change it back to PCI_VENDOR_ID_ADVANTECH in the future. Regards -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/