[PATCH] ath10k: support bus and device specific API 1 BDF selection

[Robert Marko]

Silent ping,

Does anybody have an opinion on this?

Regards,
Robert

On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 at 19:49, Robert Marko <robimarko at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Kalle,
>
> What is your opinion on this?
> I would really love to see this get merged as we are having more and
> more devices that are impacted without it.
>
> Regards,
> Robert
>
> On Fri, 17 Dec 2021 at 13:25, Thibaut <hacks at slashdirt.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Le 17 déc. 2021 à 13:06, Robert Marko <robimarko at gmail.com> a écrit :
> > >
> > > On Wed, 8 Dec 2021 at 15:07, Christian Lamparter <chunkeey at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Isn't the only user of this the non-upstreamable rb_hardconfig
> > >> mikrotik platform driver?
> >
> > The driver could be upstreamed if desirable.
> > Yet I think it’s quite orthogonal to having the possibility to dynamically load a different BDF via API 1 for each available radio, which before this patch couldn’t be done and is necessary for this particular hardware.
> >
> > >> So, in your case the devices in question
> > >> needs to setup a detour through the userspace firmware (helper+scripts)
> > >> to pull on the sysfs of that mikrotik platform driver? Wouldn't it
> > >> be possible to do this more directly?
> > >
> > > Yes, its the sole current user as its the only vendor shipping the BDF
> > > as part of the
> > > factory data and not like a userspace blob.
> > >
> > > I don't see how can it be more direct, its the same setup as when
> > > getting pre-cal
> > > data for most devices currently.
> >
> > Indeed, not sure how it could be more direct than it already is. I’m open to suggestions though.
> >
> > > I am adding Thibaut who is the author of the platform driver.
> >
> > Best,
> > Thibaut