From: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
To: Rakesh Pillai <pillair@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Abhishek Kumar <kuabhs@chromium.org>,
Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
ath10k <ath10k@lists.infradead.org>,
Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>,
linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] ath10k: add option for chip-id based BDF selection
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 07:33:52 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAD=FV=VCbjRUxUsmyk=64FLDGU=W41EXh5tdfQr1Lg83T8jiEA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <004301d6c968$12ef1b10$38cd5130$@codeaurora.org>
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 3:33 AM Rakesh Pillai <pillair@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>
> > What I'm trying to say is this. Imagine that:
> >
> > a) the device tree has the "variant" property.
> >
> > b) the BRD file has two entries, one for "board-id" (1) and one for
> > "board-id + chip-id" (2). It doesn't have one for "board-id + chip-id
> > + variant" (3).
> >
> > With your suggestion we'll see the "variant" property in the device
> > tree. That means we'll search for (1) and (3). (3) isn't there, so
> > we'll pick (1). ...but we really should have picked (2), right?
>
> Do we expect board-2.bin to not be populated with the bdf with variant field (if its necessary ?)
The whole fact that there is a fallback to begin with implies that
there can be a mismatch between the board-2.bin and the device tree
file. Once we accept that there can be a mismatch, it seems good to
try all 3 fallbacks in order.
> Seems fine for me, if we have 2 fallback names if that is needed.
OK, sounds good. So hopefully Abhishek can post a v3 based on what's
in <https://crrev.com/c/2556437> and you can confirm you're good with
it there?
-Doug
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
To: Rakesh Pillai <pillair@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Abhishek Kumar <kuabhs@chromium.org>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>,
linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
ath10k <ath10k@lists.infradead.org>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] ath10k: add option for chip-id based BDF selection
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 07:33:52 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAD=FV=VCbjRUxUsmyk=64FLDGU=W41EXh5tdfQr1Lg83T8jiEA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <004301d6c968$12ef1b10$38cd5130$@codeaurora.org>
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 3:33 AM Rakesh Pillai <pillair@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>
> > What I'm trying to say is this. Imagine that:
> >
> > a) the device tree has the "variant" property.
> >
> > b) the BRD file has two entries, one for "board-id" (1) and one for
> > "board-id + chip-id" (2). It doesn't have one for "board-id + chip-id
> > + variant" (3).
> >
> > With your suggestion we'll see the "variant" property in the device
> > tree. That means we'll search for (1) and (3). (3) isn't there, so
> > we'll pick (1). ...but we really should have picked (2), right?
>
> Do we expect board-2.bin to not be populated with the bdf with variant field (if its necessary ?)
The whole fact that there is a fallback to begin with implies that
there can be a mismatch between the board-2.bin and the device tree
file. Once we accept that there can be a mismatch, it seems good to
try all 3 fallbacks in order.
> Seems fine for me, if we have 2 fallback names if that is needed.
OK, sounds good. So hopefully Abhishek can post a v3 based on what's
in <https://crrev.com/c/2556437> and you can confirm you're good with
it there?
-Doug
_______________________________________________
ath10k mailing list
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-03 15:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-12 20:09 [PATCH v2 0/1] This patch address comments on patch v1 Abhishek Kumar
2020-11-12 20:09 ` Abhishek Kumar
2020-11-12 20:09 ` [PATCH v2 1/1] ath10k: add option for chip-id based BDF selection Abhishek Kumar
2020-11-12 20:09 ` Abhishek Kumar
2020-11-24 0:56 ` Doug Anderson
2020-11-24 0:56 ` Doug Anderson
2020-11-24 9:18 ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-11-24 9:18 ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-11-24 16:26 ` Doug Anderson
2020-11-24 16:26 ` Doug Anderson
2020-11-25 3:44 ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-11-25 3:44 ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-11-30 19:18 ` Doug Anderson
2020-11-30 19:18 ` Doug Anderson
2020-12-03 11:33 ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-12-03 11:33 ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-12-03 15:33 ` Doug Anderson [this message]
2020-12-03 15:33 ` Doug Anderson
2020-12-07 18:14 ` Abhishek Kumar
2020-12-07 18:14 ` Abhishek Kumar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAD=FV=VCbjRUxUsmyk=64FLDGU=W41EXh5tdfQr1Lg83T8jiEA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=dianders@chromium.org \
--cc=ath10k@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=briannorris@chromium.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=kuabhs@chromium.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=kvalo@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pillair@codeaurora.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.