On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 06:02:32PM +0000, Neeraj sanjay kale wrote: > Hi Francesco > > Thank you for reviewing this patch. > > > > --- a/drivers/bluetooth/btnxpuart.c > > > +++ b/drivers/bluetooth/btnxpuart.c > > ... > > > @@ -547,7 +553,7 @@ static int nxp_download_firmware(struct hci_dev > > *hdev) > > > serdev_device_set_flow_control(nxpdev->serdev, false); > > > nxpdev->current_baudrate = HCI_NXP_PRI_BAUDRATE; > > > > > > - /* Wait till FW is downloaded and CTS becomes low */ > > > + /* Wait till FW is downloaded */ > > > err = wait_event_interruptible_timeout(nxpdev->fw_dnld_done_wait_q, > > > !test_bit(BTNXPUART_FW_DOWNLOADING, > > > > > > &nxpdev->tx_state), @@ -558,16 +564,11 @@ static int > > nxp_download_firmware(struct hci_dev *hdev) > > > } > > > > > > serdev_device_set_flow_control(nxpdev->serdev, true); > > > - err = serdev_device_wait_for_cts(nxpdev->serdev, 1, 60000); > > > - if (err < 0) { > > > - bt_dev_err(hdev, "CTS is still high. FW Download failed."); > > > - return err; > > > - } > > this seems like an unrelated change, and it's moving from a 60secs timeout > > polling CTS to nothing. > > > > What's the reason for this? Should be this a separate commit with a proper > > explanation? > > > While working on integrating IW624 in btnxpuart driver, I observed that the > first reset command was getting timed out, after FW download was complete 2 > out of 10 times. On further timing analysis, I noticed that this wait for CTS > code did not actually help much, since CTS is already low after FW download, > and becomes high after few more milli-seconds, and then low again after FW is > initialized. So it was either adding a "wait for CTS high" followed by "wait > for CTS low", or simply increasing the sleep delay from 1000msec to 1200msec. > I chose the later as it seemed more cleaner, and did the job perfectly, and > tested all previously supported chipsets to make sure nothing is broke. But > you are right, I should add an explanation for this change in the commit > message in the v2 patch. This should be a separate commit, and probably it should have a fixes tag, since this is solving a bug. I recently noted some bugs around this, I just did not have the time to reproduce on the latest mainline kernel to report those. One more question on this, what about the use case in which a combo firmware is used and no firmware is loaded here? Will this use case be affected? Francesco