Alan Cox wrote:
> On Fri,  6 Jun 2008 10:13:13 +0300
> "Catalin(ux) M BOIE" <catab@embedromix.ro> wrote:
> 
>> It is a no-name PCI card. I found no reference to a producer so I
>> used the fake name "PDR".
> 
> We don't really want to get fake names into pci_ids. I'd rather

Thanks Alan for review!

> 
>>  		.vendor		= PCI_VENDOR_ID_PLX,
>> +		.device		= PCI_DEVICE_ID_PLX_9050,
>> +		.subvendor	= PCI_VENDOR_ID_PLX,
>> +		.subdevice	= PCI_SUBDEVICE_ID_PDR,
> 
> Either the hex or a local and obviously unknown name like ID_UNKNOWN_1

Do you agree to use ID_UNKNOWN_0x1584?

> 
>> +	pbn_plx_pdr,
> 
> _unknown1

And here pbn_plx_unknown_0x1584?

>>  	pbn_oxsemi,
>>  	pbn_intel_i960,
>>  	pbn_sgi_ioc3,
>> @@ -1186,6 +1196,13 @@ static struct pciserial_board pci_boards[] __devinitdata = {
>>  		.base_baud	= 115200,
>>  		.uart_offset	= 8,
>>  	},
>> +	/* PDR */
>> +	[pbn_plx_pdr] = {
> 
> Ditto
> 
>> +	/* PDR */
> 
> Ditto
> 
>> +	{	PCI_VENDOR_ID_PLX, PCI_DEVICE_ID_PLX_9050,
>> +		PCI_VENDOR_ID_PLX,
>> +		PCI_SUBDEVICE_ID_PDR, 0, 0,
> 
> Ditto
> 
> 
>> +#define PCI_SUBDEVICE_ID_PDR		0x1584
>> +
> 
> And not in here at all.
> 
> Alan

If you agree, the patch is attached.
If not, let me know and I will correct it.

Thank you!

-- 
Catalin(ux) M BOIE
http://kernel.embedromix.ro/