On Wed, 8 Feb 2017 at 08:55, David Lin <[email protected]> wrote: > > From: Rafał Miłecki [mailto:[email protected]] worte: > > On 8 February 2017 at 08:28, David Lin <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> From: Rafał Miłecki [mailto:[email protected]] worte: > > >> Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2017 3:24 PM On 8 February 2017 at > > >> 07:30, David Lin <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] wrote: > > >> >> On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 10:15 PM, David Lin <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> >> Rafał Miłecki [mailto:[email protected]] wrote: > > >> >> >> Please use ieee80211-freq-limit: > > >> >> >> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next.git > > >> >> >> /co > > >> >> >> mmi > > >> >> >> t/?id=b3 > > >> >> >> 30b25eaabda00d74e47566d9200907da381896 > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> Most likely with wiphy_read_of_freq_limits helper: > > >> >> >> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next.git > > >> >> >> /co > > >> >> >> mmi > > >> >> >> t/?id=e6 > > >> >> >> 91ac2f75b69bee743f0370d79454ba4429b175 > > >> >> > > > >> >> > I already replied meaning of these parameters: > > >> >> > <marvell,2ghz> is used to disable 2g band. > > >> >> > <marvell,5ghz> is used to disable 5g band. > > >> >> > <marvell, chainmask> is used to specify antenna number (if > > >> >> > default number > > >> >> is suitable for you, there is no need to use this parameter). > > >> >> > <marvell,powertable> should not be used for chip with device > > >> >> > power > > >> table. > > >> >> In fact, this parameter should not be used any more. > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> David, I think you're not understanding the comment, or at least > > >> >> that's what it looks like to me. Yes, you did reply as to the meaning. > > >> >> And, your reply, while informative, didn't tell us you understood > > >> >> and were willing to fix the problem. I doubt you meant it this > > >> >> way, but it feels defensive and like a brush-off. > > >> >> > > >> >> First off, you will still have to document any DT bindings you're > > >> >> adding. Just because you answer the question in the review doesn't > > >> >> mean you're not responsible for doing so. > > >> >> > > >> >> And second off, I think that Rafal (and sorry about my spelling, > > >> >> looks like there's some sort of accent on the l that I don't know > > >> >> how to make my keyboard do) is saying: there's already some > > >> >> generic bindings that can be used to disable the 2g or 5g bands. > > >> >> Granted they're even newer than your patch, but I do think if said > > >> >> bindings exist and > > >> are appropriate, you should use them. > > >> >> > > >> >> - Steve > > >> > > > >> > These parameters are marvell proprietary parameters, I don't think > > >> > it should > > >> be added to DT bindings. > > >> > > >> Steve is correct. > > >> > > >> You have to document new properties, just because they are Marvell > > >> specific doesn't change anything. You just document them in a proper > > place. > > >> > > > > > > All right. I will do that. > > > > > >> > > >> > BTW, <marvell,2ghz> and <marvell,5ghz> are only used for mwlwifi to > > >> > report > > >> supported bands, it is not related to limitation of frequency. > > >> > > >> How reporting a single band doesn't limit reported frequencies? You > > >> can achieve exactly the same using generic property, so there is no > > >> place for Marvell specific ones. > > >> > > >> In fact there were drivers of 3 vendors requiring band/freq-related > > >> description in DT: Broadcom, Marvell & Mediatek. This property was > > >> discussed & designed to support all limitation cases we found > > >> possible to make it usable with > > >> (hopefully) all drivers. > > >> > > > > > > I only need simple way to disable 2g or 5g band. I will follow your > > > suggestion > > to document these marvell proprietary parameters. > > > > Seriously? Refusing to use generic binding because you think marvell,5ghz; > > is > > simpler than ieee80211-freq-limit = <2402000 2482000>; (not to mention your > > property seems reversed!)? > > > > I don't know how else to explain this to you. We don't want duplicated > > properties where one can work. Just use existing one. Don't add new one even > > if documented. > > > > All right. I will check and let patch v10 to use it. For previous parameters, > they will only be used by previous OpenWrt projects.
Hi David, how are things going? Could we get v10? -- Rafał
