On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 22:05:12 +0300
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> It has been found that the (non-vendor issued) ACPI ID for Lite-On
> LTR303 is present in Microsoft catalog. Add it to the list of the
> supported devices.
>
> Link: https://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/Search.aspx?q=lter0303
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/r/9cdda3e0-d56e-466f-911f-96ffd6f602c8@redhat.com
> Reported-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
> Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
I'm not totally happy that the MS catalog is enough to justify inclusion.
Would prefer to have an actual device.
I'll take it anyway as better to have a policy on this than make it up
each time. So for now I want:
1) A device name or
2) Entry in the MS catalog.
Not
3) Entry in a driver on random vendor website that we have no evidence
is in their products. (the Bosch one the other day).
Jonathan
> ---
> drivers/iio/light/ltr501.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/light/ltr501.c b/drivers/iio/light/ltr501.c
> index 3fff5d58ba3c..4051d0d9e799 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/light/ltr501.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/light/ltr501.c
> @@ -1611,6 +1611,8 @@ static DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(ltr501_pm_ops, ltr501_suspend, ltr501_resume);
>
> static const struct acpi_device_id ltr_acpi_match[] = {
> { "LTER0301", ltr301 },
> + /* https://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/Search.aspx?q=lter0303 */
> + { "LTER0303", ltr303 },
> { },
> };
> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, ltr_acpi_match);