Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] arm64: dts: qcom: sc8280xp-crd: model the PMU of the on-board wcn6855

Bartosz Golaszewski
2024-09-06T09:45:53Z

On Fri, Sep 6, 2024 at 11:37 AM Dmitry Baryshkov
<dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 6 Sept 2024 at 10:45, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 9:26 PM Dmitry Baryshkov
> > <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 05, 2024 at 09:41:44PM GMT, Kalle Valo wrote:
> > > > Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@kernel.org> writes:
> > > >
> > > > > On 5.09.2024 3:00 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > > >> On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 2:56 PM Dmitry Baryshkov <dbaryshkov@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> As you are going to post another revision, please also add
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> qcom,ath11k-calibration-variant
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> I had it in earlier revisions. The only one we could add here would be
> > > > >>>> the one from X13s as QCom has not yet released the data for the CRD.
> > > > >>>> Johan and Konrad were against adding this here if it doesn't refer to
> > > > >>>> the correct one so I dropped it.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> As Kalle usually merges data with some delay it's not infrequent to
> > > > >>> have DTS which names calibration variant, but board-2.bin doesn't have
> > > > >>> corresponding data. The driver safely falls back to the data without
> > > > >>> variant if it can find it. Als usually it's us who supply the
> > > > >>> calibration name.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Johan, Konrad,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> What do you think? Do we know the exact name and should I add it or
> > > > >> should we wait until it's in board-2.bin?
> > > > >
> > > > > If we can agree on the string identifier with Kalle in advance, we can
> > > > > add it even before the boardfile drops
> > > >
> > > > There have not been really any naming rules for the variant string, it
> > > > just needs to be unique so that it doesn't conflict with other variant
> > > > strings. What have you been thinking?
> > >
> > > QC_8380_CRD (following DMI / Windows name) or QC_X1E80100_CRD (following
> > > marketing name). Or maybe QTI_ instead of QC_. WDYT?
> > >
> >
> > Is there any central authority listing these names? Or are they just
> > agreed upon on the mailing list? I honestly don't know where they come
> > from.
>
> I think on ath12k these names come from ACPI tables. On all previous
> devices it is just being agreed upon. Kalle is the central authority.
>

Kalle: is "QC_8280XP_CRD" fine for you for a board called sc8280xp-crd?

Bart