On Mon, May 20, 2024 at 09:21:16AM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote: > > > At 2024-05-17 18:49:47, "Manivannan Sadhasivam" <manivannan.sadhasivam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 05:59:03PM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote: > >> > >> At 2024-05-17 09:09:05, "Slark Xiao" <slark_xiao@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > > >> >At 2024-05-16 22:23:46, "Manivannan Sadhasivam" <manivannan.sadhasivam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >>On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 08:17:23PM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> At 2024-05-15 19:52:39, "Manivannan Sadhasivam" <mani@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >>> >On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 04:01:37PM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote: > >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> At 2024-05-15 15:41:19, "Manivannan Sadhasivam" <manivannan.sadhasivam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >>> >> >+ Qiang > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> >> >On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 09:29:20AM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote: > >> >>> >> >> At 2024-05-14 22:37:41, "Manivannan Sadhasivam" <manivannan.sadhasivam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >>> >> >> >On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 11:26:57AM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote: > >> >>> >> >> >> Align with Qcom SDX72, add ready timeout item for Foxconn SDX72. > >> >>> >> >> >> And also, add firehose support since SDX72. > >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Slark Xiao <slark_xiao@xxxxxxx> > >> >>> >> >> >> --- > >> >>> >> >> >> drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> >>> >> >> >> 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+) > >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> >> diff --git a/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c b/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c > >> >>> >> >> >> index 08844ee79654..0fd94c193fc6 100644 > >> >>> >> >> >> --- a/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c > >> >>> >> >> >> +++ b/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c > >> >>> >> >> >> @@ -399,6 +399,8 @@ static const struct mhi_channel_config mhi_foxconn_sdx55_channels[] = { > >> >>> >> >> >> MHI_CHANNEL_CONFIG_DL(13, "MBIM", 32, 0), > >> >>> >> >> >> MHI_CHANNEL_CONFIG_UL(32, "DUN", 32, 0), > >> >>> >> >> >> MHI_CHANNEL_CONFIG_DL(33, "DUN", 32, 0), > >> >>> >> >> >> + MHI_CHANNEL_CONFIG_UL_FP(34, "FIREHOSE", 32, 0), > >> >>> >> >> >> + MHI_CHANNEL_CONFIG_DL_FP(35, "FIREHOSE", 32, 0), > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >>> >> >> >This means SDX55 is also supporting FIREHOSE channels, which is not true I > >> >>> >> >> >believe. > >> >>> >> >> Actually, I just verified it with my sdx55 and the answer is Yes. These channels > >> >>> >> >> are common settings for Qcom device which support PCIe mode. BTW, the > >> >>> >> >> default settings of Qcom and Quectel support firehose for their sdx55 products. > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> >> >Qiang, can you please confirm that SDX55 supports FIREHOSE channels? > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >>> >> >> >> MHI_CHANNEL_CONFIG_HW_UL(100, "IP_HW0_MBIM", 128, 2), > >> >>> >> >> >> MHI_CHANNEL_CONFIG_HW_DL(101, "IP_HW0_MBIM", 128, 3), > >> >>> >> >> >> }; > >> >>> >> >> >> @@ -419,6 +421,16 @@ static const struct mhi_controller_config modem_foxconn_sdx55_config = { > >> >>> >> >> >> .event_cfg = mhi_foxconn_sdx55_events, > >> >>> >> >> >> }; > >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> >> +static const struct mhi_controller_config modem_foxconn_sdx72_config = { > >> >>> >> >> >> + .max_channels = 128, > >> >>> >> >> >> + .timeout_ms = 20000, > >> >>> >> >> >> + .ready_timeout_ms = 50000, > >> >>> >> >> >> + .num_channels = ARRAY_SIZE(mhi_foxconn_sdx55_channels), > >> >>> >> >> >> + .ch_cfg = mhi_foxconn_sdx55_channels, > >> >>> >> >> >> + .num_events = ARRAY_SIZE(mhi_foxconn_sdx55_events), > >> >>> >> >> >> + .event_cfg = mhi_foxconn_sdx55_events, > >> >>> >> >> >> +}; > >> >>> >> >> >> + > >> >>> >> >> >> static const struct mhi_pci_dev_info mhi_foxconn_sdx24_info = { > >> >>> >> >> >> .name = "foxconn-sdx24", > >> >>> >> >> >> .config = &modem_foxconn_sdx55_config, > >> >>> >> >> >> @@ -448,6 +460,16 @@ static const struct mhi_pci_dev_info mhi_foxconn_sdx65_info = { > >> >>> >> >> >> .sideband_wake = false, > >> >>> >> >> >> }; > >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> >> +static const struct mhi_pci_dev_info mhi_foxconn_sdx72_info = { > >> >>> >> >> >> + .name = "foxconn-sdx72", > >> >>> >> >> >> + .edl = "qcom/sdx72m/xbl_s_devprg_ns.melf", > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >>> >> >> >What is '.melf'? Is the firmware available somewhere? Did you plan to upstream > >> >>> >> >> >it to linux-firmware? > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >>> >> >> This file similar with "edl.mbn". In SDX72 product, the default "edl" file name is > >> >>> >> >> "xbl_s_devprg_ns.melf". Currently we don't plan to upstream it to linux-firmware > >> >>> >> >> since 2 reasons: 1: we share the same fold name sdx72m with qcom or other vendors > >> >>> >> >> 2: this file may be changed since sdx72 product still under developing in our side. we > >> >>> >> >> may change the base line according to QCOM release. > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> >> >Then I would ask you to add support when you have a stable firmware. I do not > >> >>> >> >want to change the firmware name after some time as it will confuse users. > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> >> >- Mani > >> >>> >> If a stable firmware must be provided, I think I shall change the folder name from qcom to > >> >>> >> fox, do you agree this? > >> >>> > > >> >>> >Even in that case, where can the user find the firmware? > >> >>> > > >> >>> I think this edl file could help user let device enter into edl mode(wwan0firehose0). > >> >>> For PCIE device, there is no opensource tool to support PCIE edl download. If user > >> >>> could get the tool to do the firehose download, I think it's not hard to get complete firmware > >> >>> from PC vendor or somewhere else. > >> >> > >> >>I was told that Qcom will upstream the PCI support for QDL in the coming weeks. > >> >>Once that happens (even if a PR), I'll share that with you. Please test it and > >> >>let me know if that works or not. > >> >> > >> >Sure. But I think this shall not the block cause for merging this patch, right? > >> >Before that PR, we have verified the firehose function in our local with our > >> >firehose tool which is not open. > > > >Yeah, QDL is not a blocker for this device. > If there is no other issue, I will release a V2 version based on the edl file path and name. > Also, I will add the ".edl_trigger=true" for my sdx72 devices. > For previous sdx55 and sdx65 firehose support, I think a new commit would be better > to cover that. > > > >> >>And for entering EDL mode, we have recently added support to trigger EDL mode > >> >>from host [1]. Could you also test that? You just need to add `edl_trigger = > >> >>true` to the `mhi_pci_dev_info` struct of SDX72 and trigger EDL mode from host > >> >>by: > >> >> > >> >>echo 1 > /sys/bus/mhi/devices/.../trigger_edl > >> >> > >> >Do you remember that I told you I want to merge such function from qualcomm driver > >> >in last year? I merge the commit from QUD driver in my local. Actually it's same as the > >> >commit [1], it's called "force_edl". And sure, the result is yes, it works well. > >> > > >> Latest test, it doesn't work in Linux V6.9 since there is a patch missing. In my local previous > >> test, there is no mhi_cntrl->edl_trigger condition to set up dev_attr_trigger_edl. > >> Seems patch [2] is missed. > >> > >> [2]-https://lore.kernel.org/mhi/1713928915-18229-4-git-send-email-quic_qianyu@xxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > >You need to apply the whole series. But anyway, thanks for testing it out. > > > >> >>> >> BTW, I need to check if it works after updating 'edl fw' from xbl_s_devprg_ns.melf to > >> >>> >> edl.mbn. > >> >>> > >> >>> > > >> >>> >Okay. IMO, we should upstream the product support only after a stable firmware > >> >>> >release (well stable in the sense a stable name at least). > >> >>> > > >> >>> >- Mani > >> >>> The check result is we can rename it to align with previous format. Until now, > >> >>> I didn't see any mhi device has upstream their firmware to /lib/firmware/qcom folder. > >> >> > >> >>It is not mandatory, but it is a best practise that I recently started asking > >> >>for. > >> >> > >> >>> If it's a must, I think we can upstream the edl file later. Anyway, we hope we can > >> >>> merge this sdx72 support into 6.10 since customer(Dell) would use this kernel for official > >> >>> release. But no worry, we can make sure this firehose download method works well in > >> >>> our local side. > >> >>> And also, please help a review about my previous email about fix sdx72 ping failure issue. > >> >>> There is a fix solution from us. > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >>Qiang is working on that. > >> >Good to hear that. BTW, may I know the feature merge window in V6.10? I don't worry about > >> >merge window of the network fix commit, since it's a fix with higher priority. But I want to > >> >merge the basic support of my SDX72 before merge window close. This is important for us. > >> > > > > >MHI tree is closed during -rc6, so there is no way this patch can make 6.10. > I saw you tag mhi-for-6.10 which was created in 4/25, before linux 6.9-RC6. > But V6.9 was just released in 5/13, and there is a lot of time before V6.10. > Why close the merge window for V6.10 so early? I need to send the PR to Greg at the -rc6 timeframe. Greg will mostly close his tree post -rc6 as he needs to pull from different sub trees before sending the PR to Linus during merge window. That's the reason. - Mani -- மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்