> Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2022 15:01:06 +0100 > From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 01:04:58PM +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 11:59:17AM +0000, Alvin Šipraga wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 10:52:41AM +0100, Russell King wrote: > > > > From: Hector Martin <marcan@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > This binding is currently used for SDIO devices, but these chips are > > > > also used as PCIe devices on DT platforms and may be represented in the > > > > DT. Re-use the existing binding and add chip compatibles used by Apple > > > > T2 and M1 platforms (the T2 ones are not known to be used in DT > > > > platforms, but we might as well document them). > > > > > > > > Then, add properties required for firmware selection and calibration on > > > > M1 machines. > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Signed-off-by: Hector Martin <marcan@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Reviewed-by: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Signed-off-by: Russell King (Oracle) <rmk+kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > .../net/wireless/brcm,bcm4329-fmac.yaml | 39 +++++++++++++++++-- > > > > 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/brcm,bcm4329-fmac.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/brcm,bcm4329-fmac.yaml > > > > index 53b4153d9bfc..fec1cc9b9a08 100644 > > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/brcm,bcm4329-fmac.yaml > > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/brcm,bcm4329-fmac.yaml > > > > @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ > > > > $id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/net/wireless/brcm,bcm4329-fmac.yaml# > > > > $schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# > > > > > > > > -title: Broadcom BCM4329 family fullmac wireless SDIO devices > > > > +title: Broadcom BCM4329 family fullmac wireless SDIO/PCIE devices > > > > > > > > maintainers: > > > > - Arend van Spriel <arend@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > @@ -41,11 +41,17 @@ title: Broadcom BCM4329 family fullmac wireless SDIO devices > > > > - cypress,cyw4373-fmac > > > > - cypress,cyw43012-fmac > > > > - const: brcm,bcm4329-fmac > > > > - - const: brcm,bcm4329-fmac > > > > + - enum: > > > > + - brcm,bcm4329-fmac > > > > + - pci14e4,43dc # BCM4355 > > > > + - pci14e4,4464 # BCM4364 > > > > + - pci14e4,4488 # BCM4377 > > > > + - pci14e4,4425 # BCM4378 > > > > + - pci14e4,4433 # BCM4387 > > > > > > > > reg: > > > > - description: SDIO function number for the device, for most cases > > > > - this will be 1. > > > > + description: SDIO function number for the device (for most cases > > > > + this will be 1) or PCI device identifier. > > > > > > > > interrupts: > > > > maxItems: 1 > > > > @@ -85,6 +91,31 @@ title: Broadcom BCM4329 family fullmac wireless SDIO devices > > > > takes precedence. > > > > type: boolean > > > > > > > > + brcm,cal-blob: > > > > + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint8-array > > > > + description: A per-device calibration blob for the Wi-Fi radio. This > > > > + should be filled in by the bootloader from platform configuration > > > > + data, if necessary, and will be uploaded to the device if present. > > > > > > Is this a leftover from a previous revision of the patchset? Because as > > > far as I can tell, the CLM blob is (still) being loaded via firmware, > > > and no additional parsing has been added for this particular OF > > > property. Should it be dropped? > > > > It does appear to be unparsed, but I don't know whether it's needed for > > the binding or not. I'll wait for the Asahi folk to review your comment > > before possibly removing it. > > Okay, the answer is, it is still very much part of the binding, and > the m1n1 boot loader populates it. > > This series is a subset of a larger series (remember the previous 34 > or 35 patch series?), so there are things in the binding document > which are not included in this series. > > I don't think it makes sense to break up the binding document given > that it has already been reviewed several times in its current state, > should we really remove this one property and throw away all that > review effort. The OpenBSD driver already uses these properties. So even if the Linux driver doesn't use this yet, there is an existing implementation that does. That should be good enough for it to be included in the binding isn't it?
