On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 08:58:40AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 8:47 AM Johan Hovold <johan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 08:31:09AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > > Thanks for the details. Sounds like we could get away with adding a new > > property for the broken firmware in this case, which should resolve this > > nicely without having to deprecate anything. > > > > Could you carry such a devicetree patch out-of-tree until the firmware > > has been fixed? > > IMO we shouldn't try to fix the firmware at all. Given the fact that > it took me a year to get a firmware uprev completed for one trogdor > variant for fixes that actually had functional impact, it's possible > we'll never actually get an uprev completed that includes this fix or > it will happen years from now when nobody remembers about it. I'm also > certain this whole issue will also cause a bunch of debugging over the > years if we try to fix it in firmware like that. There are cases where > people end up running with old firmware since the developer workflow > doesn't automatically update it. > > The handling should be added upstream and we should just accept that > the trogdor firmware gets it backward. Fair enough. Rob, are you OK with adding a 'qcom,local-bd-address-broken' or similarly named property to indicate that the boot firmware passes the address in the wrong order? I'd then add that property to sc7180-trogdor.dtsi in mainline. Johan
