Hi Marcel, > -----Original Message----- > From: Marcel Holtmann [mailto:marcel@xxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: 2011年11月17日 23:51 > To: Yao, Costa > Cc: padovan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-bluetooth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: RE: [PATCH] Bluetooth: btusb: Add Qualcomm Atheros AR3006 in > blacklist_table > > Hi Costa, > > > > > Signed-off-by: Costa Yao <cqyao@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c | 5 ++++- > > > > 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c b/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c > > > > index 39dd65c..94124ad 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c > > > > @@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ static struct usb_driver btusb_driver; > > > > #define BTUSB_BROKEN_ISOC 0x20 > > > > #define BTUSB_WRONG_SCO_MTU 0x40 > > > > #define BTUSB_ATH3012 0x80 > > > > +#define BTUSB_ATH3006 0x0100 > > > > > > > > static struct usb_device_id btusb_table[] = { > > > > /* Bluetooth USB interface */ > > > > @@ -125,6 +126,7 @@ static struct usb_device_id blacklist_table[] > > > > = { > > > > > > > > /* Atheros 3012 with sflash firmware */ > > > > { USB_DEVICE(0x0cf3, 0x3004), .driver_info = BTUSB_ATH3012 }, > > > > + { USB_DEVICE(0x0cf3, 0x3006), .driver_info = BTUSB_ATH3006 }, > > > > > > > > /* Atheros AR5BBU12 with sflash firmware */ > > > > { USB_DEVICE(0x0489, 0xe02c), .driver_info = BTUSB_IGNORE }, @@ > > > > -937,7 +939,8 @@ static int btusb_probe(struct usb_interface *intf, > > > > if (ignore_sniffer && id->driver_info & BTUSB_SNIFFER) > > > > return -ENODEV; > > > > > > > > - if (id->driver_info & BTUSB_ATH3012) { > > > > + if ((id->driver_info & BTUSB_ATH3012) || > > > > + (id->driver_info & BTUSB_ATH3006)) { > > > > struct usb_device *udev = interface_to_usbdev(intf); > > > > > > > > /* Old firmware would otherwise let ath3k driver load > > > > > > if (id->driver_info & BTUSB_ATH3012) { > > > struct usb_device *udev = interface_to_usbdev(intf); > > > > > > /* Old firmware would otherwise let ath3k driver load > > > * patch and sysconfig files */ > > > if (le16_to_cpu(udev->descriptor.bcdDevice) <= > 0x0001) > > > return -ENODEV; > > > } > > > > > > are you sure this is true for the 3006 as well? Otherwise just using > > > the BTUSB_IGNORE quirk to blacklist a device would be enough. > > > > > I send this patch just for a 3012 chip, with PID 3006. Because we need to > separate it with another 3012 chip(PID 3004). > > So we use BTUSB_ATH3012 for PID 3004 and BTUSB_ATH3006 for PID 3006. > > > > And I am sure that we need use this quirk, not BTUSB_IGNORE. Because we > need to check whether chip has been patched or not through bcdDevice value. > > so you are telling me that you guys managed to screw up another set of > hardware with the same mess as the previous one. > > Are you 100% sure you need the bcdDevice check for this generation of > hardware? Care to explain to me how that is suppose to work. Yes, before download patch, the bcdDevice <= 0x0001 in btusb.c, then ath3k driver have the opportunity to download the patch and reset the bluetooth hardware. When the hardware are enumerated the second time, the bcdDevice will larger than 0x0001. For this reason, I am 100% sure that we need do bcdDevice check. > And why you are introducing a new quirk if the handling is exactly the same. In btusb.c, yes, the handling is the same as BTUSB_ATH3012. So maybe we can use the same quirk BTUSB_ATH3012. But in ath3k.c, the handling for BTUSB_ATH3006 is different from BTUSB_ATH3012, so I want to introduce a new quirk BTUSB_ATH3006. > > Regards > > Marcel > ��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{��� �^n�r������&��z�ޗ�zf���h���~����������_��+v���)ߣ�
