On 25.11.2022 12:53, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> On 21.11.2022 14:56, Linus Walleij wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 5:47 PM Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I can think of a couple of hacky ways to force use of 43596 fw, but I
>>>> don't think any would be really upstreamable..
>>>
>>> If it is only known to affect the Sony Xperias mentioned then
>>> a thing such as:
>>>
>>> if (of_machine_is_compatible("sony,xyz") ||
>>> of_machine_is_compatible("sony,zzz")... ) {
>>> // Enforce FW version
>>> }
>>>
>>> would be completely acceptable in my book. It hammers the
>>> problem from the top instead of trying to figure out itsy witsy
>>> details about firmware revisions.
>>>
>>> Yours,
>>> Linus Walleij
>>
>> Actually, I think I came up with a better approach by pulling a page
>> out of Asahi folks' book - please take a look and tell me what you
>> think about this:
>>
>> [1]
>> https://github.com/SoMainline/linux/commit/4b6fccc995cd79109b0dae4e4ab2e48db97695e7
>> [2]
>> https://github.com/SoMainline/linux/commit/e3ea1dc739634f734104f37fdbed046873921af7
>
> Instead of a directory path ("brcm/brcmfmac43596-pcie") why not provide
> just the chipset name ("brcmfmac43596-pcie")? IMHO it's unnecessary to
> have directory names in Device Tree.
I think it's common practice to include a full $FIRMWARE_DIR-relative
path when specifying firmware in DT, though here I left out the board
name bit as that's assigned dynamically anyway. That said, if you don't
like it, I can change it.
Konrad
>
