On 2/3/2025 3:35 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

On 03/02/2025 09:43, Raj Kumar Bhagat wrote:

quoted

On 1/30/2025 2:10 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

quoted

On 30/01/2025 09:28, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 10:04:56AM +0530, Raj Kumar Bhagat wrote:

quoted

Add device-tree bindings for the ATH12K module found in the IPQ5332
device.

Signed-off-by: Raj Kumar Bhagat <redacted>
---
 .../net/wireless/qcom,ath12k-ahb.yaml         | 319 ++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 319 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/qcom,ath12k-ahb.yaml

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/qcom,ath12k-ahb.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/qcom,ath12k-ahb.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..bd953a028dc3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/qcom,ath12k-ahb.yaml

Filename should match compatible. This binding does not look like
supporting more devices, so there is no much benefit calling it by generic name.

I saw now your other patchset, so you have here two devices, but I still
do not understand why this cannot follow standard naming practice like
most bindings supporting one or more devices. Like every review we give.

Sure, we can rename the filename to match the compatibles - "qcom,ipq5x-wifi.yaml".

No:

quoted

quoted

quoted

Filename should match compatible.

Ok, will rename to - "qcom,ipq5332-wifi.yaml"