On 4/29/2021 1:08 PM, Nicolas Dechesne wrote:
On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 8:25 AM Akhil P Oommen <akhilpo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Adds a660_gmu.bin (v3.01.06) and a660_sqe.fw (v0.94) firmware blobs
required for sc7280 SoC.
Signed-off-by: Akhil P Oommen <akhilpo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
WHENCE | 2 ++
qcom/a660_gmu.bin | Bin 0 -> 55444 bytes
qcom/a660_sqe.fw | Bin 0 -> 40496 bytes
3 files changed, 2 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 qcom/a660_gmu.bin
create mode 100644 qcom/a660_sqe.fw
diff --git a/WHENCE b/WHENCE
index 3a27e34..3371dc7 100644
--- a/WHENCE
+++ b/WHENCE
@@ -5191,6 +5191,8 @@ File: qcom/sdm845/a630_zap.mbn
File: qcom/a650_gmu.bin
File: qcom/a650_sqe.fw
File: qcom/sm8250/a650_zap.mbn
+File: qcom/a660_gmu.bin
+File: qcom/a660_sqe.fw
Licence: Redistributable. See LICENSE.qcom and qcom/NOTICE.txt for details
diff --git a/qcom/a660_gmu.bin b/qcom/a660_gmu.bin
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ee1b922b45bf17899f486cd1151f0fffe3fd8eb5
GIT binary patch
For linux-firmware PR, you most likely need to send a PR from a public
branch instead. Binary patch isn't really working well. Here are
example of previous QCOM firmware PRs:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-firmware/bee73b3fe8b04c1a2663be0cd3cc7318@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-firmware/20210401201115.stkX71kzODcOGviP6NCSqy_k3M3AN3G5oqHzAyBYMWs@z/
I thought that binary patches were acceptable. It is mentioned in the
README and also, I see a lot of binary patches being posted to
linux-firmware like this:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-firmware/CA+5PVA7Deq3P_cw+Ro8xDeQeS1CTeK8RTfXUB0b5L622npvX7w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/
-Akhil.
