On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 11:15:16AM GMT, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 13, 2024 at 07:17:51PM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 12:00:03PM GMT, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> > > Some newer ADSP firmware versions on X1E80100 report an extra __le32 at the
> > > end of the battery information request payload, causing qcom_battmgr to
> > > fail to initialize. Adjust the check to ignore the extra field in the info
> > > payload so we can support both old and newer firmware versions.
> > >
> > > Tested-by: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Stephan Gerhold <stephan.gerhold@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/power/supply/qcom_battmgr.c | 4 +++-
> > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/power/supply/qcom_battmgr.c b/drivers/power/supply/qcom_battmgr.c
> > > index 46f36dcb185c..a5b5f1251af1 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/power/supply/qcom_battmgr.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/power/supply/qcom_battmgr.c
> > > @@ -1007,7 +1007,9 @@ static void qcom_battmgr_sc8280xp_callback(struct qcom_battmgr *battmgr,
> > > battmgr->error = 0;
> > > break;
> > > case BATTMGR_BAT_INFO:
> > > - if (payload_len != sizeof(resp->info)) {
> > > + /* some firmware versions report an extra __le32 at the end of the payload */
> >
> > Any useful information in that extra?
> >
>
> No, I don't think so. I think we can just ignore it.
If that's the case,
Reviewed-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
With best wishes
Dmitry
