[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZfhTmQ6mOLR8eXA5@hovoldconsulting.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 15:45:45 +0100
From: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
Cc: Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@...nel.org>,
Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@...il.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@...il.com>,
Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>,
Doug Anderson <dianders@...gle.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <quic_bjorande@...cinc.com>,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] dt-bindings: bluetooth: add new wcn3991
compatible to fix bd_addr
On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 04:17:24PM +0200, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 at 15:17, Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 03:00:40PM +0200, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > > On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 at 13:09, Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > > The only device out there that should be affected by this is the WCN3991
> > > > used in some Chromebooks. To maintain backwards compatibility, mark the
> > > > current compatible string as deprecated and add a new
> > > > 'qcom,wcn3991-bt-bdaddr-le' for firmware which conforms with the
> > > > binding.
> >
> > > This compatible doesn't describe new hardware kind. As such, I think,
> > > the better way would be to continue using qcom,wcn3991-bt compatible
> > > string + add some kind of qcom,bt-addr-le property.
> >
> > No, you can't handle backwards compatibility by *adding* a property.
> >
> > I wanted to avoid doing this, but if we have to support Google's broken
> > boot firmware for these devices, then this is how it needs to be done.
>
> One hardware compat string per hardware type.
Again, no. Not when there is an incompatible change in the binding. Then
we add a new compatible string and deprecate the old binding.
Johan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists