From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-io0-f194.google.com ([209.85.223.194]:46150 "EHLO mail-io0-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751792AbeCVK3z (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Mar 2018 06:29:55 -0400 Received: by mail-io0-f194.google.com with SMTP id g14so10321414iob.13 for ; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 03:29:54 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87po3zxe9n.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> References: <20180319014032.9394-1-alexey.roslyakov@gmail.com> <20180319014032.9394-3-alexey.roslyakov@gmail.com> <5AAF838D.2030105@broadcom.com> <817418fd-6446-57ea-b03d-383b4df9a979@gmail.com> <5AB044C0.9060701@broadcom.com> <87po3zxe9n.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> From: Ulf Hansson Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 11:29:53 +0100 Message-ID: (sfid-20180322_113104_353629_27CF71AE) Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/2] dt: bindings: add new dt entries for brcmfmac To: Kalle Valo Cc: Arend van Spriel , Florian Fainelli , Alexey Roslyakov , Andrew Lunn , Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , Franky Lin , Hante Meuleman , Chi-Hsien Lin , Wright Feng , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , brcm80211-dev-list.pdl@broadcom.com, brcm80211-dev-list@cypress.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 20 March 2018 at 10:55, Kalle Valo wrote: > Arend van Spriel writes: > >>>> If I get it right, you mean something like this: >>>> >>>> mmc3: mmc@1c12000 { >>>> ... >>>> broken-sg-support; >>>> sd-head-align = 4; >>>> sd-sgentry-align = 512; >>>> >>>> brcmf: wifi@1 { >>>> ... >>>> }; >>>> }; >>>> >>>> Where dt: bindings documentation for these entries should reside? >>>> In generic MMC bindings? Well, this is the very special case and >>>> mmc-linux maintainer will unlikely to accept these changes. >>>> Also, extra kernel code modification might be required. It could make >>>> quite trivial change much more complex. >>> >>> If the MMC maintainers are not copied on this patch series, it will >>> likely be hard for them to identify this patch series and chime in... >> >> The main question is whether this is indeed a "very special case" as >> Alexey claims it to be or that it is likely to be applicable to other >> device and host combinations as you are suggesting. >> >> If these properties are imposed by the host or host controller it >> would make sense to have these in the mmc bindings. > > BTW, last year we were discussing something similar (I mean related to > alignment requirements) with ath10k SDIO patches and at the time the > patch submitter was proposing to have a bounce buffer in ath10k to > workaround that. I don't remember the details anymore, they are on the > ath10k mailing list archive if anyone is curious to know, but I would > not be surprised if they are similar as here. So there might be a need > to solve this in a generic way (but not sure of course as I haven't > checked the details). I re-call something about these as well, here are the patches. Perhaps I should pick some of them up... https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10123137/ https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10123139/ https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10123141/ https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10123143/ Kind regards Uffe