On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 4:12 PM Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@xxxxxxxx> writes: > > >> >> I don't know DT well enough to know what the "required:" above means, > >> >> but does this take into account that there are normal "plug&play" type > >> >> of QCA6390 boards as well which don't need any DT settings? > >> > > >> > Do they require a DT node though for some reason? > >> > >> You can attach the device to any PCI slot, connect the WLAN antenna and > >> it just works without DT nodes. I'm trying to make sure here that basic > >> setup still works. > >> > > > > Sure, definitely. I there's no DT node, then the binding doesn't apply > > and the driver (the platform part of it) will not probe. > > > >> Adding also Johan and ath11k list. For example, I don't know what's the > >> plan with Lenovo X13s, will it use this framework? I guess in theory we > >> could have devices which use qcom,ath11k-calibration-variant from DT but > >> not any of these supply properties? > >> > > > > Good point. I will receive the X13s in a month from now. I do plan on > > upstreaming correct support for WLAN and BT for it as well. > > > > I guess we can always relax the requirements once a valid use-case appears? > > I think we have such cases already now: > > $ git grep ath11k-calibration-variant -- arch > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcm6490-fairphone-fp5.dts: qcom,ath11k-calibration-variant = "Fairphone_5"; > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc8280xp-lenovo-thinkpad-x13s.dts: qcom,ath11k-calibration-variant = "LE_X13S"; > > But please do check that. I'm no DT expert :) > You're thinking about making the required: field depend on the value of qcom,ath11k-calibration-variant? Am I getting this right? Bart
