2014/1/2 Cody P Schafer <devel@xxxxxxxxxx>: > On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> 2014/1/2 Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@xxxxxxxxxx>: >>> From: Cody P Schafer <devel@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> Add a few Belkin F7Dxxxx entries, with F7D4401 sourced from online >>> documentation and the "F7D7302" being observed. F7D3301, F7D3302, and >>> F7D4302 are reasonable guesses which are unlikely to cause >>> mis-detection. >>> >>> It also appears that at least the F7D3302, F7D3301, F7D7301, and F7D7302 >>> have a shared boardtype and boardrev, so use that as a fallback to a >>> "generic" F7Dxxxx board. >> >> Cody, Hauke: I'm starring at this patch for 10 minutes now and it's >> still unclear for me. >> >> You say 3301, 3302, 7301 and 7302 have the same board_* entries >> stating they can be treated with a generic ID entry. > > I included the generic BCM47XX_BOARD_BELKIN_F7DXXXX entry to catch > those boards that we don't yet have specific entries for. It allows us > to get the leds and buttons working mostly correctly. > > The specific names are included so that one can determine a more exact > board. The stock CFE requires different images for different boards > even though they are very similar. Hardware variations are simply > gigabit vs 100MB switches, usb port population, led population, and > 5Ghz radio population (none of which truly require the greater detail > in board type). OK, maybe this is sth I'm missing... Why we should care about CFE in kernel? We don't talk with CFE, do we? So we don't have to know which device's CFE is that. -- Rafał
