Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] ath10k: Introduce a devicetree quirk to skip host cap QMI requests

[Jeff Johnson <jeff.johnson@oss.qualcomm.com>]

On 11/10/2025 6:26 AM, David Heidelberg via B4 Relay wrote:
> This quirk is used so far for Xiaomi Poco F1.
> 
> I'm resending it after ~ 4 years since initial send due to Snapdragon
> 845 being one of best supported platform for mobile phones running
> Linux, so it would be shame to not have shiny support.
> 
> I'm very much open to suggestions how to solve this in a different way,
> as the original discussion thread got quiet, see
>   https://lore.kernel.org/all/b796bfee-b753-479a-a8d6-ba1fe3ee6222@ixit.cz/
> 
> There could be other devices in need of this quirk, but if they're not,
> we could make it compatible specific quirk.
> 
> Until merged, available also at:
>   https://gitlab.com/dhxx/linux/-/commits/b4/skip-host-cam-qmi-req
> 
> Signed-off-by: David Heidelberg <david@ixit.cz>
> ---
> Amit Pundir (3):
>       dt-bindings: wireless: ath10k: Introduce quirk to skip host cap QMI requests
>       ath10k: Introduce a devicetree quirk to skip host cap QMI requests
>       arm64: dts: qcom: sdm845-xiaomi-beryllium: Enable ath10k host-cap skip quirk
> 
>  .../devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/qcom,ath10k.yaml       |  6 ++++++
>  .../arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845-xiaomi-beryllium-common.dtsi |  2 ++
>  drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/qmi.c                       | 13 ++++++++++---
>  drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/snoc.c                      |  3 +++
>  drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/snoc.h                      |  1 +
>  5 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> ---
> base-commit: ab40c92c74c6b0c611c89516794502b3a3173966
> change-id: 20251110-skip-host-cam-qmi-req-e155628ebc39
> 
> Best regards,

The original thread predates me becoming an ath.git maintainer.
Just for my information, is the firmware and board files for this platform
available in linux-firmware? Or does it leverage the files already present
from the original (Android?) installation?

I ask because the alternative solution suggested by Kalle would require
modification of the board file on the device, and that seems more of a hassle
than just modifying the DT.

So I'm personally OK with this suggested approach.

/jeff