On 25/02/2025 12:45, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 11:22:25AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 25/02/2025 10:50, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: >>> On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 10:30:51AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> There is no such property as qcom,ath12k-calibration-variant: neither in >>>> the bindings nor in the driver. See dtbs_check: >>>> >>>> x1e80100-lenovo-yoga-slim7x.dtb: wifi@0: 'qcom,ath12k-calibration-variant' does not match any of the regexes: 'pinctrl-[0-9]+' >>>> >>> >>> Adding Jeff and ath12k@ to the cc list. Is the driver able to find the >>> calibration variant in case it is not running on the ACPI system? I see >>> that it uses dmi_walk. Does it work in the non-ACPI case? >> >> >> But nothing parses such string as 'qcom,ath12k-calibration-variant' (see >> git grep), so how would driver use it? > > That's what I'm asking: is the property redundant or is it correct and > it is a driver that needs to be fixed? I assume driver will need something like that property, but that's not a reason to accept incorrect one in DTS. One cannot add properties to DTS without bindings, so bypassing bindings review, and then claim "but my driver needs them". Send proper patches for driver first which will get a review. This could be instead renamed to final correct property, but since there is no user, no indication it is needed or correct, I cannot prepare such patch. I would not know what to write (e.g. "rename to qcom,foo-bar, because I have no clue"). Best regards, Krzysztof
