On 24/04/2024 11:32, quic_zijuhu wrote:
> On 4/24/2024 5:04 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>> On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 07:07:05 +0200, Wren Turkal <wt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
>>> On 4/22/24 6:00 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>
>>>> Any return value from gpiod_get_optional() other than a pointer to a
>>>> GPIO descriptor or a NULL-pointer is an error and the driver should
>>>> abort probing. That being said: commit 56d074d26c58 ("Bluetooth: hci_qca:
>>>> don't use IS_ERR_OR_NULL() with gpiod_get_optional()") no longer sets
>>>> power_ctrl_enabled on NULL-pointer returned by
>>>> devm_gpiod_get_optional(). Restore this behavior but bail-out on errors.
>>>
>>> Nack. This patch does fixes neither the disable/re-enable problem nor
>>> the warm boot problem.
>>>
>>> Zijun replied to this patch also with what I think is the proper
>>> reasoning for why it doesn't fix my setup.
>>>
>>
>> Indeed, I only addressed a single issue here and not the code under the
>> default: label of the switch case. Sorry.
>>
>> Could you give the following diff a try?
>>
>> Bart
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/bluetooth/hci_qca.c b/drivers/bluetooth/hci_qca.c
>> index 92fa20f5ac7d..0e98ad2c0c9d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/bluetooth/hci_qca.c
>> +++ b/drivers/bluetooth/hci_qca.c
>> @@ -2327,16 +2327,21 @@ static int qca_serdev_probe(struct
>> serdev_device *serdev)
>> (data->soc_type == QCA_WCN6750 ||
>> data->soc_type == QCA_WCN6855)) {
>> dev_err(&serdev->dev, "failed to acquire BT_EN gpio\n");
>> - power_ctrl_enabled = false;
>> + return PTR_ERR(qcadev->bt_en);
>> }
>>
>> + if (!qcadev->bt_en)
>> + power_ctrl_enabled = false;
>> +
>> qcadev->sw_ctrl = devm_gpiod_get_optional(&serdev->dev, "swctrl",
>> GPIOD_IN);
>> if (IS_ERR(qcadev->sw_ctrl) &&
>> (data->soc_type == QCA_WCN6750 ||
>> data->soc_type == QCA_WCN6855 ||
>> - data->soc_type == QCA_WCN7850))
>> - dev_warn(&serdev->dev, "failed to acquire SW_CTRL gpio\n");
>> + data->soc_type == QCA_WCN7850)) {
>> + dev_err(&serdev->dev, "failed to acquire SW_CTRL gpio\n");
>> + return PTR_ERR(qcadev->sw_ctrl);
>> + }
>>
>> qcadev->susclk = devm_clk_get_optional(&serdev->dev, NULL);
>> if (IS_ERR(qcadev->susclk)) {
>> @@ -2355,10 +2360,13 @@ static int qca_serdev_probe(struct
>> serdev_device *serdev)
>> qcadev->bt_en = devm_gpiod_get_optional(&serdev->dev, "enable",
>> GPIOD_OUT_LOW);
>> if (IS_ERR(qcadev->bt_en)) {
>> - dev_warn(&serdev->dev, "failed to acquire enable gpio\n");
>> - power_ctrl_enabled = false;
>> + dev_err(&serdev->dev, "failed to acquire enable gpio\n");
>> + return PTR_ERR(qcadev->bt_en);
>> }
>>
>> + if (!qcadev->bt_en)
>> + power_ctrl_enabled = false;
>> +
>> qcadev->susclk = devm_clk_get_optional(&serdev->dev, NULL);
>> if (IS_ERR(qcadev->susclk)) {
>> dev_warn(&serdev->dev, "failed to acquire clk\n");
> i suggest stop here and request you code review for my changes, i found
> the issue and given fix for my concern.
What are you answering to? What the heck are you implying here?
I think this crosses some threshold of ridiculous mailings.
Please get your managers or colleagues to review your patches and
process you follow.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
