netdev - Re: [PATCH v9 1/2] dt-bindings: net: wireless: qcom,ath11k: describe the ath11k on QCA6390

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 12:09:33 +0300
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,  "David S . Miller"
 <davem@...emloft.net>,  Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,  Jakub
 Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,  Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,  Rob Herring
 <robh@...nel.org>,  Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,  Conor
 Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,  Jeff Johnson <jjohnson@...nel.org>,
  linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,  netdev@...r.kernel.org,
  devicetree@...r.kernel.org,  ath11k@...ts.infradead.org,
  linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,  ath12k@...ts.infradead.org,  Bartosz
 Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>,  Krzysztof Kozlowski
 <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 1/2] dt-bindings: net: wireless: qcom,ath11k:
 describe the ath11k on QCA6390

Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl> writes:

> On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 2:52 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 2:49 PM Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl> writes:
>> >
>> > >> >> Sure, I don't need DT but that's not my point. My point is why require
>> > >> >> these supplies for _all_ devices having PCI id 17cb:1101 (ie. QCA6390)
>> > >> >> then clearly there are such devices which don't need it? To me that's
>> > >> >> bad design and, if I'm understanding correctly, prevents use of
>> > >> >> qcom,ath11k-calibration-variant property. To me having the supplies
>> > >> >> optional in DT is more approriate.
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >
>> > >> > We require them because *they are physically there*.
>> > >>
>> > >> I understand that for all known DT QCA6390 hardware, the supplies should
>> > >> be provided thus they should be required. If in the future we have
>> > >> different design or we represent some pluggable PCI card, then:
>> > >> 1. Probably that PCI card does not need power sequencing, thus no DT
>> > >> description,
>> > >> 2. If still needs power sequencing, you can always amend bindings and
>> > >> un-require the supplies.
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> Best regards,
>> > >> Krzysztof
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > > Kalle, does the above answer your questions? Are these bindings good to go?
>> >
>> > To me most important is that we are on the same page that in some cases
>> > (eg. with M.2 boards) the supplies can be optional and we can update the
>> > bindings doc once such need arises (but we don't make any changes right
>> > now). Based on point 2 from Krzysztof I think we all agree, right?
>> >
>> > Just making sure: if we later change the supplies optional does that
>> > create any problems with backwards compatibility? It's important that
>> > updates go smoothly.
>>
>> No, you can always relax the requirements alright. It's only when you
>> make them more strict that you'll run into backward compatibility
>> issues.
>>
>> Bart
>
> Kalle,
>
> Is that ok with you? Can we get that queued to avoid the new
> check_dtbs warnings in next when the DTS changes land?

Yes, this patchset is already on our pending branch and should be
applied soon. I was on a long weekend hence the delay.

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches