From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E2CDC4321D for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 01:34:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D3D0208CD for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 01:34:07 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 1D3D0208CD Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=canonical.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726985AbeHWFBR (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Aug 2018 01:01:17 -0400 Received: from youngberry.canonical.com ([91.189.89.112]:48363 "EHLO youngberry.canonical.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726233AbeHWFBR (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Aug 2018 01:01:17 -0400 Received: from mail-pl0-f71.google.com ([209.85.160.71]) by youngberry.canonical.com with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1fseVe-0001mq-64 for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 01:34:02 +0000 Received: by mail-pl0-f71.google.com with SMTP id e8-v6so1742740plt.4 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2018 18:34:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=V4D7UkXXWqrBPxImEp3Uu9sddqFo5Agazjl0MV7sERg=; b=p8UFeBCXZIKsUA06vPYiow8XlDcXMfTqKUR/QPWbfnBYLjiP/DWs13bM6/aho5oY03 r8fynDjByMujxenG05p43xOB4wn0VuYZyCBkTUjQh5pvHwZ6UD40VFDbJPE5Ynhd5Trq V4a1+LmslHCLMrM2H9TN0PRGZ9zV1slQ4Ep+0Iy5pKb7aXsKD/gLjO+fHQ6G6cgb7xxd t8CfHeyNxwzulFi58biuovKcrvr7y5ow7csTRUnxF0O1Kgiri0KV50y+3RH320Gcz7Du FPC62j72vLDW2p0h3S7EkqHOGMirGrmTYBjAPV1Ysf64y/vGQH2Kr7aDNS3Pgm8Xnlpr ZBzA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlHhJAM9/3vBxPZsRJ+9VElPGQp3guZA0Dhuw8CINQB/wDTB6lCD GLVQUvvC3HVqe0gS9knKuDV8OWfsCanjZIETNpJtvuS2n4ncKB3WUCZ2+SIEToNTzabToRfxdjD 8SD9gkifDo+9vdmtmGsbGcmNCwSUeCEkim0X48SCdAQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:b784:: with SMTP id e4-v6mr26250414pls.204.1534988040923; Wed, 22 Aug 2018 18:34:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPw8awKZNw3cgpMUSzvnAH2Ghmh6C4eCmNyRmyitgk5r3w6MrSosU0ELkbAMg4WVpLjQAA7OsA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:b784:: with SMTP id e4-v6mr26250400pls.204.1534988040554; Wed, 22 Aug 2018 18:34:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.206] (220-133-187-190.HINET-IP.hinet.net. [220.133.187.190]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l85-v6sm5072926pfk.34.2018.08.22.18.33.58 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 22 Aug 2018 18:34:00 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; delsp=yes; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath9k: turn on btcoex_enable as default From: Kai-Heng Feng In-Reply-To: <6A0F65EF-A7C4-469F-8FAF-CBE314676237@canonical.com> Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2018 09:33:56 +0800 Cc: Kalle Valo , ath9k-devel@qca.qualcomm.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: <9AF82E83-2EBE-4076-BAFA-EEA44B1DB423@canonical.com> References: <20180208052801.15670-1-kai.heng.feng@canonical.com> <56d650e6-d26f-087c-4e86-2e5d4e859414@nbd.name> <87k1vmeip8.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> <7170e2d5-a59d-8260-fa8e-f02f583b773f@nbd.name> <6A0F65EF-A7C4-469F-8FAF-CBE314676237@canonical.com> To: Felix Fietkau X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org at 12:15, Kai Heng Feng wrote: > > >> On 10 Feb 2018, at 10:05 PM, Felix Fietkau wrote: >> >> On 2018-02-10 14:56, Kai Heng Feng wrote: >>>> On 9 Feb 2018, at 3:16 PM, Kalle Valo wrote: >>>> Sure, but we have to make sure that we don't create regressions on >>>> existing systems. For example, did you test this with any system which >>>> don't support btcoex? (just asking, haven't tested this myself) >>> >>> No not really, but I will definitely test it. >>> The only module I have that uses ath9k is Dell’s DW1707. >>> How do I check if it support btcoex or not? >> I just reviewed the code again, and I am sure that we cannot merge this >> patch. Enabling the btcoex parameter makes the driver enable a whole >> bunch of code starting timers, listening to some GPIOs, etc. >> >> On non-btcoex systems, some of those GPIOs might be floating or even >> connected to different things, which could cause a lot of undefined >> behavior. >> >> This is simply too big a risk, so there absolutely needs to be a >> whitelist for systems that need this, otherwise it has to remain >> disabled by default. > > So what information can we use to whitelist btcoex chips? > Can we get btcoex support status at ath9k probing? Sorry for bringing this up again. Is DMI based match an acceptable approach for ath9k? Kai-Heng > > Kai-Heng > >> - Felix