Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless+bounces-4262-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 2024 18:40:57 +0000
From: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>
To: Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>
Cc: Marc Gonzalez <mgonzalez@freebox.fr>,
	Jeff Johnson <quic_jjohnson@quicinc.com>,
	ath10k <ath10k@lists.infradead.org>,
	wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	DT <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
	Pierre-Hugues Husson <phhusson@freebox.fr>,
	Jami Kettunen <jamipkettunen@gmail.com>,
	Jeffrey Hugo <quic_jhugo@quicinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: net: wireless: ath10k: add
 qcom,no-msa-ready-indicator prop
Message-ID: <20240229-ageless-primal-7a0544420949@spud>
References: <14daa98e-7fd3-4ebb-87bb-5d2c1fba679f@freebox.fr>
 <b8de96c7-cbb6-4a09-a4d4-2c11b3ab3e01@freebox.fr>
 <871q8wk7o3.fsf@kernel.org>
 <3392f356-7b19-483d-b9f8-3bd84068fa52@freebox.fr>
 <87wmqoilzf.fsf@kernel.org>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="cEg17b20MxyCi/dL"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87wmqoilzf.fsf@kernel.org>


--cEg17b20MxyCi/dL
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 06:37:08PM +0200, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Marc Gonzalez <mgonzalez@freebox.fr> writes:

> > As mentioned in my other reply, there are several msm8998-based
> > devices affected by this issue. Is it not appropriate to consider
> > a kernel-based work-around?
>=20
> Sorry, not following you here. But I'll try to answer anyway:
>=20
> I have understood that Device Tree is supposed to describe hardware, not
> software. This is why having this property in DT does not look right
> place for this. For example, if the ath10k firmware is fixed then DT
> would have to be changed even though nothing changed in hardware. But of
> course DT maintainers have the final say.

I dunno, if the firmware affects the functionality of the hardware in a
way that cannot be detected from the operating system at runtime how
else is it supposed to deal with that?
The devicetree is supposed to describe hardware, yes, but at a certain
point the line between firmware and hardware is invisible :)
Not describing software is mostly about not using it to determine
software policy in the operating system.

--cEg17b20MxyCi/dL
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iHUEABYIAB0WIQRh246EGq/8RLhDjO14tDGHoIJi0gUCZeDPuQAKCRB4tDGHoIJi
0oklAQCb9liXgCtU0yqoCxGYrPtfMDdWh7iUxPWsScbIPS343AD/c6Wr2hVOtmtB
qj/WEDA/Sdh/5pt/pXxfhjnLYJ4shA4=
=+qJ3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--cEg17b20MxyCi/dL--