On Sunday, January 21, 2018 10:49:19 PM CET Ben Greear wrote: > > On 01/21/2018 07:54 AM, Christian Lamparter wrote: > > On Saturday, January 20, 2018 1:27:04 AM CET gree...@candelatech.com wrote: > >> From: Ben Greear <gree...@candelatech.com> > >> > >> Initial beta release of the CT IPQ4019 firmware. Features are > >> similar to the CT 9984 firmware > > >> +$(eval $(call BuildPackage,ath10k-firmware-qca4019-ct-htt)) > >> +$(eval $(call BuildPackage,ath10k-firmware-qca4019-ct)) > >> $(eval $(call BuildPackage,ath10k-firmware-qca9888-ct)) > >> > > --- > > I applied the full series on top of the r5904 (see attached > > diffconfig). But I ran into issues when selecting ath10k-ct > > and ath10k-firmware-qca4019-ct during image creation. > > So what's the recommended way to install these? > > Are you able to un-select the default firmware? In that case, > there should be no issue with the board-2.bin? Try the diffconfig. It a multi-image built that includes all the current qca4019 targets. From what I can see, neither kmod-ath10k or ath10k-firmware-qca4019 can be deselected. At best kmod-ath10k can be compiled as an installable package (=m). However ath10k-firmware-qca4019 will always be included (=y) (due to the ipq-wifi packages' DEPENDS).
kconfig/menuconfig provides some information to why the packages are being picked: kmod-ath10k is Selected by: MODULE_DEFAULT_kmod-ath10k [=y] && \ TARGET_PER_DEVICE_ROOTFS [=y] && m && MODULES [=y] ath10k-firmware-qca4019 is Selected by: MODULE_DEFAULT_ath10k-firmware-qca4019 [=y] && TARGET_PER_DEVICE_ROOTFS [=y] \\ && m && MODULES [=y] || PACKAGE_ipq-wifi-avm_fritzbox-4040 [=m] && \ TARGET_ipq806x [=y] || PACKAGE_ipq-wifi-openmesh_a42 [=y] && TARGET_ipq806x [=y] && (m && MODULES [=y] || PACKAGE_ipq-wifi-avm_fritzbox-4040 [=m]!=y) > I expect the use case is to install exactly one of the firmware targets. > > If we take the board-2.bin out of the firmware install target, then users > would somehow have to know to install some sort of board-2.bin or similar > file, otherwise the driver still will not load. > > Since some boards have their own custom board-2.bin, I'm not sure how to > automate this properly. But, if we just assume users will select the > right thing, then splitting board-2.bin out of the FW install target > should be OK I guess? I guess. Separating the board-2.bin files also has an advantage that it will make it possible for users to update the ath10k-firmware-* package on a deployed system without needing to reinstall the custom ipq-wifi for their device each time. But why not ask the ath10k-firmware package maintainer for input as well? It could just be that a solution is just hiding in plain sight. For example a easy solution would be just add a short note to the package description of ath10k-firmware-qca4019-ct(-htt) like the one that was added to ath10k-firmware-qca9984-ct: "This firmware conflicts with the standard 9984 firmware, so select only one." [0] (but tailored to qca4019). This will leave it to the user to either select/deselect the right firmware and driver combo manually. Another possible way would be to set the "CONFLICTS" variable on the kmod-ath10k(-ct) and all the ath10k-firmware-* packages. This would have the advantage that the package/firmware/driver selection would be automatic. Or maybe there's an elegant solution with "ALTERNATIVES"/"REPLACES"/"PROVIDES"/ "DEPENDS" package variables. With the kmod-ath10k-ct and ath10k-firmware-*-ct packages at a higher priority, so they'll take precedence if selected. ... etc. Regards, Christian [0] <https://git.openwrt.org/?p=openwrt/openwrt.git;a=blob;f=package/firmware/ath10k-firmware/Makefile;h=94e59537834a67e8b9d469f6a050697e6cf24789;hb=HEAD#l145> _______________________________________________ Lede-dev mailing list Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev