Thanks for taking a look, Krzysztof.
In this case I think it would be easiest to just use the existing
qca9377 fallback and drop his part of the patchset.
As for the supplies: For the particular module I am working with the
supplies are mostly shared with the WiFi side. So it "just works"
without taking care of supplies on the BT side.
But I agree it would be more correct to add and handle these as well.
The documentation I have access to through the FCC filing of this module
is not really conclusive of how to correctly name them in this context.
I would rather avoid submitting a patch with incorrect supply names.
Thanks again,
Felix
On 2024-08-05 01:31, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 05/08/2024 06:01, Felix Kaechele wrote:
Document that the QCA9379, as a member of the QCA6174 family, is
supported by the existing driver.
Signed-off-by: Felix Kaechele <felix@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/net/bluetooth/qualcomm-bluetooth.yaml | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/bluetooth/qualcomm-bluetooth.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/bluetooth/qualcomm-bluetooth.yaml
index 68c5ed111417..f968b0d236e0 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/bluetooth/qualcomm-bluetooth.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/bluetooth/qualcomm-bluetooth.yaml
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ properties:
- qcom,qca2066-bt
- qcom,qca6174-bt
- qcom,qca9377-bt
+ - qcom,qca9379-bt
Then use fallback of 9377 or any other device. I still wonder why you do
not require any supplies.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
