Hi Arend,
On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 11:30:59PM +0200, Arend van Spriel wrote:
> > > Hi Rob,
> > >
> > > Actually the Broadcom wifi chips themselves are discoverable. So once the
> > > driver has access to the register space of the device it can determine the
> > > actual chip, its revision, and exactly what cores (and their revision) are
> > > present in the chip. Hence there is a single compatible string as there is
> > > no need to convey the same information through device tree data.
> >
> > In my expereince this how it seems to work.
> >
> > I jsut discovered s/brcm,bcm4329-fmac/brcm/ can load the broadcom driver.
> >
> > brcmf: wifi@1 {
> > reg = <1>;
> > compatible = "brcm";
> > };
> >
> > This looks better to me. Maxime, Would this work?
>
> I have no idea what you are saying here. To what exactly do you apply that
> substitute. In brcmfmac I have:
Thanks for pointing me to the relevent code. I was asking about DT support I
submitted.
>
> if (!np || bus_type != BRCMF_BUSTYPE_SDIO ||
> !of_device_is_compatible(np, "brcm,bcm4329-fmac"))
> return;
>
> In my perception using "brcm" goes against DT compatible naming convention.
It seems the driver has a special place holder, bcm4329-fmac.
I am still wondering what is acceptable in the DT.
compatible = ""brcm,bcm4329-fmac";
or
compatible = "brcm";
The last one does not generate any warnings.
Here it the DT I am proposing. https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9937263/
regards,
-antony
