Re: [PATCH v2 16/35] brcmfmac: acpi: Add support for fetching Apple ACPI properties

[Kalle Valo]

Hector Martin <marcan@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On 2022/01/04 19:21, Arend van Spriel wrote:
>> On 1/4/2022 8:26 AM, Hector Martin wrote:
>>> On DT platforms, the module-instance and antenna-sku-info properties
>>> are passed in the DT. On ACPI platforms, module-instance is passed via
>>> the analogous Apple device property mechanism, while the antenna SKU
>>> info is instead obtained via an ACPI method that grabs it from
>>> non-volatile storage.
>>>
>>> Add support for this, to allow proper firmware selection on Apple
>>> platforms.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Hector Martin <marcan@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>   .../broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/Makefile      |  2 +
>>>   .../broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/acpi.c        | 47 +++++++++++++++++++
>>>   .../broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/common.c      |  1 +
>>>   .../broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/common.h      |  9 ++++
>>>   4 files changed, 59 insertions(+)
>>>   create mode 100644 drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/acpi.c
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/Makefile b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/Makefile
>>> index 13c13504a6e8..19009eb9db93 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/Makefile
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/Makefile
>>> @@ -47,3 +47,5 @@ brcmfmac-$(CONFIG_OF) += \
>>>   		of.o
>>>   brcmfmac-$(CONFIG_DMI) += \
>>>   		dmi.o
>>> +brcmfmac-$(CONFIG_ACPI) += \
>>> +		acpi.o
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/acpi.c b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/acpi.c
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 000000000000..2b1a4448b291
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/acpi.c
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
>>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: ISC
>>> +/*
>>> + * Copyright The Asahi Linux Contributors
>>> + */
>> 
>> Common format for copyright statement (in this folder) seems to be:
>> 
>> Copyright (c) <YEAR> <COPYRIGHT_HOLDER>
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Arend
>
> I get this every time I submit a patch to a new subsystem :-)
>
> This is based on this best practice:
>
> https://www.linuxfoundation.org/blog/copyright-notices-in-open-source-software-projects/

I didn't know about this recommendation, thanks.

> Basically, the year format quickly becomes outdated and is rather
> useless, and listing specific names also ends up missing every
> subsequent contributor, so more general copyright statements work better
> for this kind of use case. In the end we all know git history is the
> proper record of copyright status.
>
> I don't have a super strong opinion here, but we've been trying to
> standardize on this format for contributions coming from our subproject,
> and it feels more useful than a random contributor's name with a date 5
> years in the past :)

If LF is fine with this approach, then it's good enough also for me. So
at least from my point of view no need to make any changes.

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches