Re: [PATCH v7 1/2] Bluetooth: qca: Fix BT enable failure for QCA6390

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On 4/23/24 10:46 PM, quic_zijuhu wrote:
On 4/24/2024 1:37 PM, Wren Turkal wrote:
On 4/23/24 10:02 PM, quic_zijuhu wrote:
On 4/24/2024 12:30 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 24/04/2024 06:26, Zijun Hu wrote:
Commit 56d074d26c58 ("Bluetooth: hci_qca: don't use IS_ERR_OR_NULL()
with gpiod_get_optional()") will cause below serious regression issue:

BT can't be enabled any more after below steps:
cold boot -> enable BT -> disable BT -> BT enable failure
if property enable-gpios is not configured within DT|ACPI for QCA6390.

The commit wrongly changes flag @power_ctrl_enabled set logic for this
case as shown by its below code applet and causes this serious issue.
qcadev->bt_en = devm_gpiod_get_optional(&serdev->dev, "enable",
- if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(qcadev->bt_en)) {
+ if (IS_ERR(qcadev->bt_en)) {
        dev_warn(&serdev->dev, "failed to acquire enable gpio\n");
     power_ctrl_enabled = false;

Fixed by reverting the mentioned commit for QCA6390.

Fixes: 56d074d26c58 ("Bluetooth: hci_qca: don't use IS_ERR_OR_NULL()
with gpiod_get_optional()")
Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Reported-by: Wren Turkal <wt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Zijun Hu <quic_zijuhu@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Tested-by: Wren Turkal <wt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
V6 -> V7: Add stable tag

Stop sending multiple pathchsets per day. I already asked you to first
finish discussion and then send new version. You again start sending
something while previous discussion is going.
you concern is wrong and i am sure it don't block me sending new patch
sets to solve other issue. so i send this v7.

i have give reply for Bartosz' patch.

i hop you as DTS expert to notice my concern about DTS in the reply.

Are you saying here (1) that you identified a problem in the DTs that
you hope Krzysztof notices or (2) that you want Krzysztof to notice how
your description of way that DT declares the gpio as required affects
your proposed change. As a native American English speaker, I am finding
your text hard to follow.

1) is my purpose. i have given my concern about DTS for Bartosz' patch
and hope DTS expert notice the concern.

my change don't have any such concern about DTS usage. that is why i
changed my fix from original reverting the whole wrong commit to now
focusing on QCA6390.

Let me try to parse this. If #1 is the correct interpretation, does that mean that the DTs are wrong and need to be changed? Do you expect K to do that since he's the "DTS expert"?

I think you are saying #2.

I just want to make sure I am following the discussion here.


You're more amazing than you think!

[Index of Archives]     [Bluez Devel]     [Linux Wireless Networking]     [Linux Wireless Personal Area Networking]     [Linux ATH6KL]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Media Drivers]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Big List of Linux Books]

  Powered by Linux