Hi, if I haven't overlooked it, the patch does not provide a "factory" Image as in ar71xx, at least according to "Flashing instructions".
Is this specific to this patch or is there some reason why factory won't be available for XM on ath79 at all? Best Adrian > -----Original Message----- > From: openwrt-devel [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of Lech Perczak > Sent: Freitag, 16. November 2018 18:47 > To: Petr Štetiar <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] ath79: Add support for Ubiquity > Bullet M2HP > > Hi, > > W dniu 2018-11-16 o 16:13, Petr Štetiar pisze: > > Lech Perczak <[email protected]> [2018-11-15 19:30:00]: > > > > Hi, > > > >> Just a couple of remarks inline, based on my knowledge about XM series. > > thanks for the review! > > > >>> + ubnt,bullet-m2hp|\ > >> I'd call it ubnt,bullet-m-xw, as this patch will very likely support > >> Bullet-M5HP also. > > Ok > > > >>> + link4 { > >>> + label = "ubnt:green:link4"; > >>> + gpios = <&gpio 14 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>; > >>> + }; > >>> + }; > >>> +}; > >> Shouldn't those LEDs be defined in ar9342_ubnt_xw.dtsi? > >> AFAIK all XW boards (Bullet, Nano, Rocket) use same LED > >> configurations, like in XM target also. > > It's hard for me to add support for something I don't have on the > > table and can't test it at least quickly, so it's hard to guess what > > should be common and share stuff and what's separate for each device. > > This is the situation where we have to rely on knowledge of others :) The > whole range of Ubiquiti Airmax devices uses essentially those two boards, > with functionally-equivalent variants based on XM and XW boards. > > For example, Nanostation is basically a Bullet with extra ethernet port, and > Rocket is a Bullet with added USB port. > As far as I understand ar71xx code, the same situation is present on XW > boards. Same functionality, different SoCs. > > Feel free to ask me any questions on this topic :) > > > > >> Please take a look at ath79 device tree for XM boards and for board > >> file for XW in ar71xx. > > I did, but wasn't smart from that anyway. I would need more experience > > with those device to understand the differencies. > It'd be great if support for all of them could be included in > ar9342_ubnt_xw.dtsi, and then secondary ethernet and USB only enabled in > respective .dts files. It'd be even better if someone on the list had a Rocket > M XW to test, as it is the fullest variant. > > Unfortunately I only have access to XM-based devices :( > > > > >>> + DEVICE_TITLE := Ubiquiti Bullet M2HP > >> Same as before, I'd call it ubnt_bullet-m-xw, as this patchset should > >> automatically support Bullet-M5HP also. > > Ok so it might be safe to change it to `Ubiquiti Bullet M2 and M5 HP (XW)` ? > I'd go with just Ubiquiti Bullet-M (XW), as this target will directly support > also > Nanobridge and Powerbeam series, which also have frequency variants > available for 900MHz and 3.4GHz bands (for licensed or amateur radio use). > > > > -- ynezz > > > Also, wouldn't you mind reviewing and/or testing my PR regarding RSSI > indicator LEDs on your M2HP on ar71xx target? > It is located on Github: https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/pull/1372 > I only had a chance to test it against Nanobridge M5 (XM version). > Also please rebase it on top of current master if you do decide to test it :) > > -- > With kind regards, > Lech > > > _______________________________________________ > openwrt-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
pgpi0HXPe8Iw1.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
