On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 05:33:01PM +0300, Kalle Valo wrote: > Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On 8/13/2018 7:14 PM, Brian Norris wrote: > >> On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 11:26 AM Arend van Spriel > >> <arend.vanspriel@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> > >>> On 8/11/2018 1:39 AM, Brian Norris wrote: > >>>> Devices may provide their own MAC address via system firmware (e.g., > >>> > >>> You got me confused by using just "firmware" in the subject. > >> > >> Yeah...I started by writing this patch with device tree specifically > >> (of_get_mac_address()), and then later found that there were generic > >> "device" helpers for this, which can assist with other sorts of > >> firmware nodes. It was easier to put a name on a device tree patch > >> than on a "device" patch. I suppose "system firmware" might be a > >> better description? > >> > >>>> device tree), especially in the case where the device doesn't have a > >>>> useful EEPROM on which to store its MAC address (e.g., for integrated > >>>> Wifi). > >>>> > >>>> Use the generic device helper to retrieve the MAC address, and (if > >>>> present) honor it above the MAC address advertised by the card. > >>> > >>> But this put me back on track ;-) > >> > >> Let me know if you have a better way to clarify. I can resend with a > >> slightly modified subject (s/firmware/system firmware/), or let Kalle > >> do it, if that's the only thing to change. > > > > "system firmware" substitution works for me. > > What about: > > ath10k: retrieve MAC address from Device Tree if provided > > Because from ath10k point of view we use Device Tree functions and don't > care if it's delivered by pidgeons or by system firmware :) I don't care too much, but note that Device Tree is a loaded term, usually referring specifically to a method of describing system hardware via the Flattened Device Tree format. If I were specifically targeting Device Tree, I'd use helpers like of_get_mac_address() instead. (The 'of_*' prefix is a relic of OpenFirmware, an early firmware implementation that used the Device Tree format.) If you're trying to say "device tree" to refer to "the Linux device hierarchy", then that's also a fair description. But that's all starting to mince words. Device Tree (with or without capitalization) is fine with me. Thanks, Brian > I can change this before I commit. > > -- > Kalle Valo
