| Message ID | 1516392726-28656-2-git-send-email-greearb@candelatech.com |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested |
| Delegated to: | Mathias Kresin |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [LEDE-DEV,1/4] Update to latest ath10k-ct driver, enable AHB. | expand |
On Friday, January 19, 2018 9:12:04 PM CET greearb@candelatech.com wrote: > From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> > > This will allow us to select the CT IPQ4019 firmware instead if > desired. > > Signed-off-by: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> > --- > package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile b/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile > index 519e8c9..6690248 100644 > --- a/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile > +++ b/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile > @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ define Package/ipq-wifi-default > SUBMENU:=ath10k IPQ4019 Boarddata > SECTION:=firmware > CATEGORY:=Firmware > - DEPENDS:=@TARGET_ipq806x +ath10k-firmware-qca4019 > + DEPENDS:=@TARGET_ipq806x > TITLE:=Custom Board > endef > Wait! I remember talking about this here in the RFC thread: <https://www.mail-archive.com/lede-dev@lists.infradead.org/msg09621.html> |Hm, this would break the WIFI in the default configuration for the |FritzBox 4040 image. Currently it only has a dependency on the |ipq-wifi-fritz4040. (So it will end up without a firmware-5.bin) What gives? Are you trying to break the AVM FRITZ!Box 4040 image on purpose?
On 01/19/2018 01:03 PM, Christian Lamparter wrote: > On Friday, January 19, 2018 9:12:04 PM CET greearb@candelatech.com wrote: >> From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> >> >> This will allow us to select the CT IPQ4019 firmware instead if >> desired. >> >> Signed-off-by: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> >> --- >> package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile b/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile >> index 519e8c9..6690248 100644 >> --- a/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile >> +++ b/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile >> @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ define Package/ipq-wifi-default >> SUBMENU:=ath10k IPQ4019 Boarddata >> SECTION:=firmware >> CATEGORY:=Firmware >> - DEPENDS:=@TARGET_ipq806x +ath10k-firmware-qca4019 >> + DEPENDS:=@TARGET_ipq806x >> TITLE:=Custom Board >> endef >> > > Wait! I remember talking about this here in the RFC thread: > <https://www.mail-archive.com/lede-dev@lists.infradead.org/msg09621.html> > |Hm, this would break the WIFI in the default configuration for the > |FritzBox 4040 image. Currently it only has a dependency on the > |ipq-wifi-fritz4040. (So it will end up without a firmware-5.bin) > > What gives? Are you trying to break the AVM FRITZ!Box 4040 image on purpose? Of course I'm not trying to break anything. But, I am not sure how to fix this properly. Does each platform need to specifically enable a firmware target instead of depending on a DEPENDS statement to make it work? Is there some other way I can provide an option for two different firmware binaries? Thanks, Ben
On Friday, January 19, 2018 10:06:50 PM CET Ben Greear wrote: > On 01/19/2018 01:03 PM, Christian Lamparter wrote: > > On Friday, January 19, 2018 9:12:04 PM CET greearb@candelatech.com wrote: > >> From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> > >> > >> This will allow us to select the CT IPQ4019 firmware instead if > >> desired. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> > >> --- > >> package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile | 2 +- > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile b/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile > >> index 519e8c9..6690248 100644 > >> --- a/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile > >> +++ b/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile > >> @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ define Package/ipq-wifi-default > >> SUBMENU:=ath10k IPQ4019 Boarddata > >> SECTION:=firmware > >> CATEGORY:=Firmware > >> - DEPENDS:=@TARGET_ipq806x +ath10k-firmware-qca4019 > >> + DEPENDS:=@TARGET_ipq806x > >> TITLE:=Custom Board > >> endef > >> > > > > Wait! I remember talking about this here in the RFC thread: > > <https://www.mail-archive.com/lede-dev@lists.infradead.org/msg09621.html> > > |Hm, this would break the WIFI in the default configuration for the > > |FritzBox 4040 image. Currently it only has a dependency on the > > |ipq-wifi-fritz4040. (So it will end up without a firmware-5.bin) > > > > What gives? Are you trying to break the AVM FRITZ!Box 4040 image on purpose? > > Of course I'm not trying to break anything. But, I am not sure how to > fix this properly. I remember writing about this too. It's in the reply. <https://www.mail-archive.com/lede-dev@lists.infradead.org/msg09626.html> |I think there's a another way to do this. But it will require to break with |the existing convention of adding the board-2.bin that comes with the |firmware repository to the ath10k-firmware-qca4019 file. | |This way, the custom board-2.bin will stay in place when you switch/update |the firmware-5.bin. | |(The board-2.bin for the reference boards can simply be packaged just like |one of the ipq-wifi board firmwares). And furhtermore, you could provide a |"easy to use/install" custom ipq-wifi.ipk for the board-2.bin you currently |host on your webside. Of course, if you have a better idea let's hear it too. You could look into making virtual packages (Don't know, if that's a thing with opkg, or not. So watch out!) or go a different route. I'm sure there's plenty of ways to do it. If you come up with something, I'll be happy to test it. > Does each platform need to specifically enable a firmware target instead of > depending on a DEPENDS statement to make it work? From what I know, the platform (ipq806x) does not add any firmware packages to DEFAULT_PACKAGES in the target/linux/ipq806x/Makefile. It's all "per-device". (That said, you might want to talk to Sven Eckelmann too. As he has added the ath10k-firmware-qca4019 package to the OpenMesh a42's DEVICE_PACKAGES. So, if ath10k-ct is selected on a a42 it will also include the (now useless) ath10k-firmware-qca4019, right?) > Is there some other way I can provide an option for two different firmware > binaries? The firmware binaries (i.e. firmware-X.bin) are not the problem. It's the "board-2.bin" files that are shipped by the ath10k-firmware-qca4019/9984/.. packages. Regards, Christian
On 01/20/2018 11:15 AM, Christian Lamparter wrote: > On Friday, January 19, 2018 10:06:50 PM CET Ben Greear wrote: >> On 01/19/2018 01:03 PM, Christian Lamparter wrote: >>> On Friday, January 19, 2018 9:12:04 PM CET greearb@candelatech.com wrote: >>>> From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> >>>> >>>> This will allow us to select the CT IPQ4019 firmware instead if >>>> desired. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> >>>> --- >>>> package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile | 2 +- >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile b/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile >>>> index 519e8c9..6690248 100644 >>>> --- a/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile >>>> +++ b/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile >>>> @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ define Package/ipq-wifi-default >>>> SUBMENU:=ath10k IPQ4019 Boarddata >>>> SECTION:=firmware >>>> CATEGORY:=Firmware >>>> - DEPENDS:=@TARGET_ipq806x +ath10k-firmware-qca4019 >>>> + DEPENDS:=@TARGET_ipq806x >>>> TITLE:=Custom Board >>>> endef >>>> >>> >>> Wait! I remember talking about this here in the RFC thread: >>> <https://www.mail-archive.com/lede-dev@lists.infradead.org/msg09621.html> >>> |Hm, this would break the WIFI in the default configuration for the >>> |FritzBox 4040 image. Currently it only has a dependency on the >>> |ipq-wifi-fritz4040. (So it will end up without a firmware-5.bin) >>> >>> What gives? Are you trying to break the AVM FRITZ!Box 4040 image on purpose? >> >> Of course I'm not trying to break anything. But, I am not sure how to >> fix this properly. > I remember writing about this too. It's in the reply. > <https://www.mail-archive.com/lede-dev@lists.infradead.org/msg09626.html> > |I think there's a another way to do this. But it will require to break with > |the existing convention of adding the board-2.bin that comes with the > |firmware repository to the ath10k-firmware-qca4019 file. > | > |This way, the custom board-2.bin will stay in place when you switch/update > |the firmware-5.bin. > | > |(The board-2.bin for the reference boards can simply be packaged just like > |one of the ipq-wifi board firmwares). And furhtermore, you could provide a > |"easy to use/install" custom ipq-wifi.ipk for the board-2.bin you currently > |host on your webside. > Of course, if you have a better idea let's hear it too. You could look into > making virtual packages (Don't know, if that's a thing with opkg, or not. > So watch out!) or go a different route. I'm sure there's plenty of ways to > do it. If you come up with something, I'll be happy to test it. > >> Does each platform need to specifically enable a firmware target instead of >> depending on a DEPENDS statement to make it work? > From what I know, the platform (ipq806x) does not add any firmware packages to > DEFAULT_PACKAGES in the target/linux/ipq806x/Makefile. It's all "per-device". > > (That said, you might want to talk to Sven Eckelmann too. As he has added > the ath10k-firmware-qca4019 package to the OpenMesh a42's DEVICE_PACKAGES. > So, if ath10k-ct is selected on a a42 it will also include the (now useless) > ath10k-firmware-qca4019, right?) > >> Is there some other way I can provide an option for two different firmware >> binaries? > The firmware binaries (i.e. firmware-X.bin) are not the problem. It's the > "board-2.bin" files that are shipped by the ath10k-firmware-qca4019/9984/.. > packages. > > Regards, > Christian Why don't you just select the default non -ct firmware in the DEVICE_PACKAGES for each board in target/linux/ipq806x/image/Makefile and remove this dependency. Then the default images generated by build bot will still contain them, but when you manually build an image or use the image builder you can replace this FW with your own -ct version. DEVICE_PACKAGES is just a default selection and not a hard dependency. Hauke
On 01/20/2018 02:15 AM, Christian Lamparter wrote: > On Friday, January 19, 2018 10:06:50 PM CET Ben Greear wrote: >> On 01/19/2018 01:03 PM, Christian Lamparter wrote: >>> On Friday, January 19, 2018 9:12:04 PM CET greearb@candelatech.com wrote: >>>> From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> >>>> >>>> This will allow us to select the CT IPQ4019 firmware instead if >>>> desired. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> >>>> --- >>>> package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile | 2 +- >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile b/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile >>>> index 519e8c9..6690248 100644 >>>> --- a/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile >>>> +++ b/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile >>>> @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ define Package/ipq-wifi-default >>>> SUBMENU:=ath10k IPQ4019 Boarddata >>>> SECTION:=firmware >>>> CATEGORY:=Firmware >>>> - DEPENDS:=@TARGET_ipq806x +ath10k-firmware-qca4019 >>>> + DEPENDS:=@TARGET_ipq806x >>>> TITLE:=Custom Board >>>> endef >>>> >>> >>> Wait! I remember talking about this here in the RFC thread: >>> <https://www.mail-archive.com/lede-dev@lists.infradead.org/msg09621.html> >>> |Hm, this would break the WIFI in the default configuration for the >>> |FritzBox 4040 image. Currently it only has a dependency on the >>> |ipq-wifi-fritz4040. (So it will end up without a firmware-5.bin) >>> >>> What gives? Are you trying to break the AVM FRITZ!Box 4040 image on purpose? >> >> Of course I'm not trying to break anything. But, I am not sure how to >> fix this properly. > I remember writing about this too. It's in the reply. > <https://www.mail-archive.com/lede-dev@lists.infradead.org/msg09626.html> > |I think there's a another way to do this. But it will require to break with > |the existing convention of adding the board-2.bin that comes with the > |firmware repository to the ath10k-firmware-qca4019 file. > | > |This way, the custom board-2.bin will stay in place when you switch/update > |the firmware-5.bin. > | > |(The board-2.bin for the reference boards can simply be packaged just like > |one of the ipq-wifi board firmwares). And furhtermore, you could provide a > |"easy to use/install" custom ipq-wifi.ipk for the board-2.bin you currently > |host on your webside. > Of course, if you have a better idea let's hear it too. You could look into > making virtual packages (Don't know, if that's a thing with opkg, or not. > So watch out!) or go a different route. I'm sure there's plenty of ways to > do it. If you come up with something, I'll be happy to test it. > >> Does each platform need to specifically enable a firmware target instead of >> depending on a DEPENDS statement to make it work? > From what I know, the platform (ipq806x) does not add any firmware packages to > DEFAULT_PACKAGES in the target/linux/ipq806x/Makefile. It's all "per-device". > > (That said, you might want to talk to Sven Eckelmann too. As he has added > the ath10k-firmware-qca4019 package to the OpenMesh a42's DEVICE_PACKAGES. > So, if ath10k-ct is selected on a a42 it will also include the (now useless) > ath10k-firmware-qca4019, right?) > >> Is there some other way I can provide an option for two different firmware >> binaries? > The firmware binaries (i.e. firmware-X.bin) are not the problem. It's the > "board-2.bin" files that are shipped by the ath10k-firmware-qca4019/9984/.. > packages. I was testing on a semi-private Jalepeno v2 tree yesterday, and I did not need the 2/4 patch to select -ct firmware. So, maybe the original issue I faced is actually not an issue any more. Or, maybe that private tree already had some hacks in it that made it work. Maybe you could test the 3 -v2 patches I posted on your 4019 device and see if you can select -ct firmware? The board.bin issue would be the same with -ct or stock 4019 firmware AFAIK, so if that is still an issue, it is a separate one. Thanks, Ben
(Readded: Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@hauke-m.de>) On Saturday, January 20, 2018 5:40:08 PM CET Ben Greear wrote: > > On 01/20/2018 02:15 AM, Christian Lamparter wrote: > > On Friday, January 19, 2018 10:06:50 PM CET Ben Greear wrote: > >> On 01/19/2018 01:03 PM, Christian Lamparter wrote: > >>> On Friday, January 19, 2018 9:12:04 PM CET greearb@candelatech.com wrote: > >>>> From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> > >>>> > >>>> This will allow us to select the CT IPQ4019 firmware instead if > >>>> desired. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> > >>>> --- > >>>> package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile | 2 +- > >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile b/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile > >>>> index 519e8c9..6690248 100644 > >>>> --- a/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile > >>>> +++ b/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile > >>>> @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ define Package/ipq-wifi-default > >>>> SUBMENU:=ath10k IPQ4019 Boarddata > >>>> SECTION:=firmware > >>>> CATEGORY:=Firmware > >>>> - DEPENDS:=@TARGET_ipq806x +ath10k-firmware-qca4019 > >>>> + DEPENDS:=@TARGET_ipq806x > >>>> TITLE:=Custom Board > >>>> endef > >>>> > >>> > >>> Wait! I remember talking about this here in the RFC thread: > >>> <https://www.mail-archive.com/lede-dev@lists.infradead.org/msg09621.html> > >>> |Hm, this would break the WIFI in the default configuration for the > >>> |FritzBox 4040 image. Currently it only has a dependency on the > >>> |ipq-wifi-fritz4040. (So it will end up without a firmware-5.bin) > >>> > >>> What gives? Are you trying to break the AVM FRITZ!Box 4040 image on purpose? > >> > >> Of course I'm not trying to break anything. But, I am not sure how to > >> fix this properly. > > I remember writing about this too. It's in the reply. > > <https://www.mail-archive.com/lede-dev@lists.infradead.org/msg09626.html> > > |I think there's a another way to do this. But it will require to break with > > |the existing convention of adding the board-2.bin that comes with the > > |firmware repository to the ath10k-firmware-qca4019 file. > > | > > |This way, the custom board-2.bin will stay in place when you switch/update > > |the firmware-5.bin. > > | > > |(The board-2.bin for the reference boards can simply be packaged just like > > |one of the ipq-wifi board firmwares). And furhtermore, you could provide a > > |"easy to use/install" custom ipq-wifi.ipk for the board-2.bin you currently > > |host on your webside. > > Of course, if you have a better idea let's hear it too. You could look into > > making virtual packages (Don't know, if that's a thing with opkg, or not. > > So watch out!) or go a different route. I'm sure there's plenty of ways to > > do it. If you come up with something, I'll be happy to test it. > > > >> Does each platform need to specifically enable a firmware target instead of > >> depending on a DEPENDS statement to make it work? > > From what I know, the platform (ipq806x) does not add any firmware packages to > > DEFAULT_PACKAGES in the target/linux/ipq806x/Makefile. It's all "per-device". > > > > (That said, you might want to talk to Sven Eckelmann too. As he has added > > the ath10k-firmware-qca4019 package to the OpenMesh a42's DEVICE_PACKAGES. > > So, if ath10k-ct is selected on a a42 it will also include the (now useless) > > ath10k-firmware-qca4019, right?) > > > >> Is there some other way I can provide an option for two different firmware > >> binaries? > > The firmware binaries (i.e. firmware-X.bin) are not the problem. It's the > > "board-2.bin" files that are shipped by the ath10k-firmware-qca4019/9984/.. > > packages. > > Maybe you could test the 3 -v2 patches I posted on your 4019 device and see if > you can select -ct firmware? > > The board.bin issue would be the same with -ct or stock 4019 firmware AFAIK, > so if that is still an issue, it is a separate one. Done. It looks like the ath10k-ct & ct-firmware used to work but was broken by: <https://git.openwrt.org/?p=openwrt/openwrt.git;a=commit;h=021b96d7c5c668fbcb5375c65cee90832bb2854f> |rootfs: remove unnecessary and potentially harmful force flags from opkg call | |Especially --force-overwrite and --force-depends will often lead to broken |images; it's better to fail the build in such cases than to silently ignore |the errors. | |Instead, ignore errors in the per-device rootfs opkg remove command, so |the build doesn't break when packages can't be removed because of |dependencies. | |Signed-off-by: Matthias Schiffer <mschiffer@universe-factory.net> Is this correct, if so this should be fixed one way or another. Regards, Christian
On 01/20/2018 02:56 AM, Hauke Mehrtens wrote: > On 01/20/2018 11:15 AM, Christian Lamparter wrote: >> On Friday, January 19, 2018 10:06:50 PM CET Ben Greear wrote: >>> On 01/19/2018 01:03 PM, Christian Lamparter wrote: >>>> On Friday, January 19, 2018 9:12:04 PM CET greearb@candelatech.com wrote: >>>>> From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> >>>>> >>>>> This will allow us to select the CT IPQ4019 firmware instead if >>>>> desired. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile | 2 +- >>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile b/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile >>>>> index 519e8c9..6690248 100644 >>>>> --- a/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile >>>>> +++ b/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile >>>>> @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ define Package/ipq-wifi-default >>>>> SUBMENU:=ath10k IPQ4019 Boarddata >>>>> SECTION:=firmware >>>>> CATEGORY:=Firmware >>>>> - DEPENDS:=@TARGET_ipq806x +ath10k-firmware-qca4019 >>>>> + DEPENDS:=@TARGET_ipq806x >>>>> TITLE:=Custom Board >>>>> endef >>>>> >>>> >>>> Wait! I remember talking about this here in the RFC thread: >>>> <https://www.mail-archive.com/lede-dev@lists.infradead.org/msg09621.html> >>>> |Hm, this would break the WIFI in the default configuration for the >>>> |FritzBox 4040 image. Currently it only has a dependency on the >>>> |ipq-wifi-fritz4040. (So it will end up without a firmware-5.bin) >>>> >>>> What gives? Are you trying to break the AVM FRITZ!Box 4040 image on purpose? >>> >>> Of course I'm not trying to break anything. But, I am not sure how to >>> fix this properly. >> I remember writing about this too. It's in the reply. >> <https://www.mail-archive.com/lede-dev@lists.infradead.org/msg09626.html> >> |I think there's a another way to do this. But it will require to break with >> |the existing convention of adding the board-2.bin that comes with the >> |firmware repository to the ath10k-firmware-qca4019 file. >> | >> |This way, the custom board-2.bin will stay in place when you switch/update >> |the firmware-5.bin. >> | >> |(The board-2.bin for the reference boards can simply be packaged just like >> |one of the ipq-wifi board firmwares). And furhtermore, you could provide a >> |"easy to use/install" custom ipq-wifi.ipk for the board-2.bin you currently >> |host on your webside. >> Of course, if you have a better idea let's hear it too. You could look into >> making virtual packages (Don't know, if that's a thing with opkg, or not. >> So watch out!) or go a different route. I'm sure there's plenty of ways to >> do it. If you come up with something, I'll be happy to test it. >> >>> Does each platform need to specifically enable a firmware target instead of >>> depending on a DEPENDS statement to make it work? >> From what I know, the platform (ipq806x) does not add any firmware packages to >> DEFAULT_PACKAGES in the target/linux/ipq806x/Makefile. It's all "per-device". >> >> (That said, you might want to talk to Sven Eckelmann too. As he has added >> the ath10k-firmware-qca4019 package to the OpenMesh a42's DEVICE_PACKAGES. >> So, if ath10k-ct is selected on a a42 it will also include the (now useless) >> ath10k-firmware-qca4019, right?) >> >>> Is there some other way I can provide an option for two different firmware >>> binaries? >> The firmware binaries (i.e. firmware-X.bin) are not the problem. It's the >> "board-2.bin" files that are shipped by the ath10k-firmware-qca4019/9984/.. >> packages. >> >> Regards, >> Christian > > Why don't you just select the default non -ct firmware in the > DEVICE_PACKAGES for each board in target/linux/ipq806x/image/Makefile > and remove this dependency. Then the default images generated by build > bot will still contain them, but when you manually build an image or use > the image builder you can replace this FW with your own -ct version. > > DEVICE_PACKAGES is just a default selection and not a hard dependency. Christian, how about this option? I think this is how the rest of the ath10k devices work, or no one would ever have been able to select ath10k-ct firmware to begin with? I'd like to go ahead and get my 3 patches in, and can work on splitting out the board-2.bin options later? Thanks, Ben > > Hauke >
diff --git a/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile b/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile index 519e8c9..6690248 100644 --- a/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile +++ b/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ define Package/ipq-wifi-default SUBMENU:=ath10k IPQ4019 Boarddata SECTION:=firmware CATEGORY:=Firmware - DEPENDS:=@TARGET_ipq806x +ath10k-firmware-qca4019 + DEPENDS:=@TARGET_ipq806x TITLE:=Custom Board endef