On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Please find a better way to identify relevant FW. What exactly affects >> > which FW can be used, or would ideally be used? Are different FWs >> > required for the same HW in some contexts? >> > >> > Can we not figure out the relevant FW names in the driver based on some >> > identification mechanism (e.g. a more thoroughly defined set of >> > compatible strings)? >> The only way of auto-detecting a "correct" name would be via >> dev_name() (with some prefix this could give something like >> ath9k-pci-0000:00:0e.0.bin). > > That may work, if the above is not an option. I would also prefer this (Felix' email already contains an explanation why this way is preferred and I fully agree with him). >> >> +- qca,check-eeprom-endianness: Allow checking the EEPROM endianness and >> >> + swapping of the EEPROM data if required >> > >> > CAn we not simply always do this? >> I've asked myself this question as well, but unfortunately some >> manufacturers ship the EEPROM data with incorrect endianness magic. >> Thus I decided to stay consistent with ath9k_platform_data which also >> has a boolean (which defaults to false). > > Ah. It's probably worth a note in the binding that this is not always > safe, and should only be set if the eeprom is known to have valid > endianness magic. > > It would also be worth specifying teh behaviour in the absence of this > property. noted, I will fix this in the next round >> >> >> +- qca,disable-2ghz: Disables the 2.4GHz band, even if enabled in the EEPROM >> >> +- qca,disable-5ghz: Disables the 5GHz band, even if enabled in the EEPROM >> > >> > When/why would these be necessary? >> sometimes a manufacturer (accidentally) leaves both bands enabled in >> the EEPROM data,while the RF hardware is only suitable for one of both >> bands. The same settings exist in ath9k_platform_data, serving exactly >> the same purpose > > Ok. Can we invert these instead (i.e. describe when the feature is > available)? e.g. qca,supports-2ghz. we could invert these, but I think the "disable" logic was chosen with a good reason: the ath9k calibration data already contains the information which bands are enabled/disabled. Enabling a band via devicetree / platform data is not possible, because that would mean we would have to pass additional calibration data for this band. The only use-case where these disable-Xghz properties are used is when the device vendor forgot to disable one of the bands. I can improve the documentation for this one, but I would prefer to stay with the disable naming/logic Martin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
