[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <EC2778B3-B957-4F3F-B299-CC18805F8381@slashdirt.org>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021 13:25:28 +0100
From: Thibaut <hacks@...shdirt.org>
To: Robert Marko <robimarko@...il.com>
Cc: Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@...il.com>,
Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>, kvalo@...eaurora.org,
davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, ath10k@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath10k: support bus and device specific API 1 BDF
selection
> Le 17 déc. 2021 à 13:06, Robert Marko <robimarko@...il.com> a écrit :
>
> On Wed, 8 Dec 2021 at 15:07, Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> Isn't the only user of this the non-upstreamable rb_hardconfig
>> mikrotik platform driver?
The driver could be upstreamed if desirable.
Yet I think it’s quite orthogonal to having the possibility to dynamically load a different BDF via API 1 for each available radio, which before this patch couldn’t be done and is necessary for this particular hardware.
>> So, in your case the devices in question
>> needs to setup a detour through the userspace firmware (helper+scripts)
>> to pull on the sysfs of that mikrotik platform driver? Wouldn't it
>> be possible to do this more directly?
>
> Yes, its the sole current user as its the only vendor shipping the BDF
> as part of the
> factory data and not like a userspace blob.
>
> I don't see how can it be more direct, its the same setup as when
> getting pre-cal
> data for most devices currently.
Indeed, not sure how it could be more direct than it already is. I’m open to suggestions though.
> I am adding Thibaut who is the author of the platform driver.
Best,
Thibaut
Powered by blists - more mailing lists