From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30DEAC432BE for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 17:55:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16F2960F14 for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 17:55:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S243193AbhHZR4a (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Aug 2021 13:56:30 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:51486 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230525AbhHZR4a (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Aug 2021 13:56:30 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-x102d.google.com (mail-pj1-x102d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102d]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 06C26C061757 for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 10:55:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x102d.google.com with SMTP id ot2-20020a17090b3b4200b0019127f8ed87so6379902pjb.1 for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 10:55:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=5QpB1GS1bNm9c/XkPMFobCG51c0nT9lIzApBMHol1ns=; b=fUBgcOfiPdHqZ5kIwdTonbiILh8nStgbawVBub001+mLIXxQSRMYvffkZCAhEM1NQH Sg5qBN6Abk8Xt9gUtW1hC1Ln5Xn0sfasGyqNiYlx7ec4HWywdDooyvmBS+v74UemDofu NOvc2phjwXVJEPk1Q6vJOeuUhAvFEGsRlqqZw= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=5QpB1GS1bNm9c/XkPMFobCG51c0nT9lIzApBMHol1ns=; b=NHPYdYnqGfMAQ95idW9tqR8WW2GFUTPZc4IpiDsc6wizv2TMwRxybbfR1naGOtAszy CHwR99EA0Wz+TXhMSxvhhXZcYiS9hs82ZjVaE3rkSdonmMPkN0MvLwCbEw17owwgRX7B U5klEk+DN9JMQlv7Dcjtxz7wjXxLl55YcSvdglJk0Sspwz7LIUp/DocRXGYXen2aaeHE cGzOyINmu/+eCLX064m7FN0B9daWQ661X5P40vnxioX0tOwZDO2O2o5pE779q0pwjuEH FVdps/mjA+yJ1Bp+si8C96VuF/LM7DoqV4OG68UCJ+7sG+Rk6CfdGgr4Z0NPoR1ucbge RvHw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533LlGWfT7SLFZskQOkVANn39jhEK0yuZxfuY5MnwyGXX5QkwPsZ O9xVROB56bmYN6SXuq8Lt4e+HQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzG+SCorxuLWOXOn1Ede81vBcYmHRu514PXPvO54BZrWLJCoFq6ylHVMNpo/iOganlPrc/6Pw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:1f09:: with SMTP id u9mr17872717pja.206.1630000542589; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 10:55:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2620:15c:202:201:bd0b:bcb8:ebdb:c24d]) by smtp.gmail.com with UTF8SMTPSA id b17sm4462648pgl.61.2021.08.26.10.55.41 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 26 Aug 2021 10:55:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2021 10:55:39 -0700 From: Matthias Kaehlcke To: Zijun Hu Cc: marcel@holtmann.org, johan.hedberg@gmail.com, luiz.dentz@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, bgodavar@codeaurora.org, c-hbandi@codeaurora.org, hemantg@codeaurora.org, rjliao@codeaurora.org, tjiang@codeaurora.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] Bluetooth: btusb: Add support using different nvm for variant WCN6855 controller Message-ID: References: <1629793683-28770-1-git-send-email-zijuhu@codeaurora.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 02:12:00AM -0700, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote: > On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 04:28:03PM +0800, Zijun Hu wrote: > > From: Tim Jiang > > > > we have variant wcn6855 soc chip from different foundries, so we should > > use different nvm file with suffix to distinguish them. > > Similar question as on v4: why is it necessary to know where a chip was > manufactured? Is the hardware different? Should the FW behave differently > for some reason (e.g. regulatory differences)? Tim briefly responded in private, I'm not sure if I'm allowed to share it publicly. I still doubt whether the 'foundry' is the right way to split things, I'm more inclined towards the concept of a 'variant', which is more flexible. Anyway, I'll leave it to the maintainers, if they are happy with the foundry thing I'm fine with it.