Re: [PATCH net-next v2] dt-bindings: net: ath11k: document the inputs of the ath11k on WCN6855

[Bartosz Golaszewski]

On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 5:47 PM Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@xxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> >> > +  - if:
> >> > +      properties:
> >> > +        compatible:
> >> > +          contains:
> >> > +            const: pci17cb,1103
> >> > +    then:
> >> > +      required:
> >> > +        - vddrfacmn-supply
> >> > +        - vddaon-supply
> >> > +        - vddwlcx-supply
> >> > +        - vddwlmx-supply
> >> > +        - vddrfa0p8-supply
> >> > +        - vddrfa1p2-supply
> >> > +        - vddrfa1p8-supply
> >> > +        - vddpcie0p9-supply
> >> > +        - vddpcie1p8-supply
> >>
> >> Like we discussed before, shouldn't these supplies be optional as not
> >> all modules need them?
> >>
> >
> > The answer is still the same: the ATH11K inside a WCN6855 does - in
> > fact - always need them. The fact that the X13s doesn't define them is
> > bad representation of HW and I'm fixing it in a subsequent DTS patch.
>
> But, like we discussed earlier, M.2 boards don't need these so I think
> this should be optional.
>

If they are truly dynamic, plug-and-play M.2 boards then they
shouldn't need any description in device-tree. If they are M.2 sockets
that use custom, vendor-specific pins (like what is the case on
sc8280xp-crd and X13s) then the HW they carry needs to be described
correctly. We've discussed that before.

Bart