On 5/21/2024 2:45 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> Make the driver use qcom_fw_helper to autodetect the path to the
> calibration data file.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/remoteproc/qcom_wcnss.c | 6 ++++++
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_wcnss.c b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_wcnss.c
> index 421a3943a90d..45fc578ae30b 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_wcnss.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_wcnss.c
> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
> #include <linux/regulator/consumer.h>
> #include <linux/remoteproc.h>
> #include <linux/soc/qcom/mdt_loader.h>
> +#include <linux/soc/qcom/fw_helper.h>
> #include <linux/soc/qcom/smem.h>
> #include <linux/soc/qcom/smem_state.h>
>
> @@ -555,8 +556,13 @@ static int wcnss_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> if (ret < 0 && ret != -EINVAL)
> return ret;
>
> + fw_name = qcom_get_board_fw(fw_name);
> + if (!fw_name)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> rproc = devm_rproc_alloc(&pdev->dev, pdev->name, &wcnss_ops,
> fw_name, sizeof(*wcnss));
> + kfree(fw_name);
> if (!rproc) {
> dev_err(&pdev->dev, "unable to allocate remoteproc\n");
> return -ENOMEM;
>
can you cleanly bisect to this patch? seems it depends upon patch 10.
should 09 & 10 be swapped, or perhaps squashed?
