On Dienstag, 7. März 2017 08:30:54 CET Adrian Chadd wrote: > "use your own bmi ids". :-) > > (yeah, this is going to make open source firmware for these things > more painful than it should be. :( )
Thanks for the reply. I was just informed that the firmware binary will behave
differently depending on the bmi-board-id (even when the rest of the content
is the same).
The selection of an own bmi id is therefore also not an actual option. Ok,
maybe in some cases but not in general.
The method to have a single board-2.bin for QCA4019 and to let ath10k select
the right one using bmi-board-id, bmi-chip-id and bus is simply not working.
Either the board-2.bin is simply not used and only the pre-cal data is used
(as seen in Christian Lamparter's/Michal Kazior's patch [1]) or each board has
to come with its own board-2.bin. The latter brings up the license problem
mentioned by Christian [2]. Both have the problem that QCA (for some reason)
wants that always the board-2.bin is used which comes with the "ath10k"
firmware binary [3].
Kind regards,
Sven
[1] https://www.mail-archive.com/ath10k@lists.infradead.org/msg05911.html
[2] https://www.mail-archive.com/ath10k@lists.infradead.org/msg06509.html
[3] btw. this QCA seems to contradict itself here by helping ODMs to
create their own boardata files
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k
