[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YRpJN414JQyfyEGo@kroah.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2021 13:17:11 +0200
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Slark Xiao <slark_xiao@....com>
Cc: Reinhard Speyerer <rspmn@...or.de>, johan@...nel.org,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] [V2,1/1]USB: serial: option: add Foxconn T77W175
composition 0x901d
On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 05:25:20PM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote:
> At 2021-08-16 17:20:59, "Greg KH" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 05:17:00PM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote:
> >> So should I use USB_DEVICE_INTERFACE_NUMBER(QUALCOMM_VENDOR_ID, 0x901d, 0x00) to bind Diag port only?
> >
> >Why is this device using the QUALCOMM vendor id anyway? Is this allowed
> >by Qualcomm?
> >
> >thanks,
> >
> >greg k-h
>
> Hi Greg,
> Our product are designed based on Qualcomm SDX55 platform. So it still support Qualcomm vendor ID.
> I think there is no infringement about this ID combo.
Do you have permission from Qualcomm to use their vendor id? I know
some vendors get very upset about this...
Why not use your own vendor id?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists