On 07/22/2016 09:52 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 11:08:42PM -0700, Andrew Duggan wrote:
Signed-off-by: Andrew Duggan <aduggan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
This version includes Nick's suggestion of adding force to the device tree
parameters so make it obvious that these parameters overwrite the
default values set in the firware config.
Why do we want to support overwriting firmware behavior in DT instead of
flashing new firmware as needed by the product?
If the firmware was configured incorrectly it might just be easier to
add a device tree entry. This would allow platform owners to make the
change without having to get Synaptics involved or have access to our
tools. Customers have also requested using the same module and firmware
across multiple platforms. Tracking which firmware is on which part
would create an additional support burden and not all platforms have an
automated way of checking and updating firmware versions in the event
that a system is build with a module which has the incorrect firmware.
It is possible that neither of these cases will ever happen and the
bindings will never be used. I figured it was better to have the options
available if needed. But, if we want to avoid having tons of device tree
parameters which are never used then we can leave this patch out and I
can resubmit it if there is a platform which ends up needing them.
Andrew
Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
