On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 03:55:56PM +0800, tjiang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> the RF performance of wcn6855 soc chip from different foundries will be
> difference, so we should use different nvm to configure them.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tim Jiang <tjiang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c | 56
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
> 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c b/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c
> index 75c83768c257..f352ff351b61 100644
> --- a/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c
> +++ b/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c
> @@ -3190,6 +3190,9 @@ static int btusb_set_bdaddr_wcn6855(struct hci_dev
> *hdev,
> #define QCA_DFU_TIMEOUT 3000
> #define QCA_FLAG_MULTI_NVM 0x80
>
> +#define WCN6855_2_0_RAM_VERSION_GF 0x400c1200
> +#define WCN6855_2_1_RAM_VERSION_GF 0x400c1211
> +
> struct qca_version {
> __le32 rom_version;
> __le32 patch_version;
> @@ -3221,6 +3224,7 @@ static const struct qca_device_info
> qca_devices_table[] = {
> { 0x00000302, 28, 4, 16 }, /* Rome 3.2 */
> { 0x00130100, 40, 4, 16 }, /* WCN6855 1.0 */
> { 0x00130200, 40, 4, 16 }, /* WCN6855 2.0 */
> + { 0x00130201, 40, 4, 16 }, /* WCN6855 2.1 */
> };
>
> static int btusb_qca_send_vendor_req(struct usb_device *udev, u8 request,
> @@ -3375,6 +3379,43 @@ static int btusb_setup_qca_load_rampatch(struct
> hci_dev *hdev,
> return err;
> }
>
> +static void btusb_generate_qca_nvm_name(char *fwname,
> + size_t max_size,
> + struct qca_version *ver)
=> const struct qca_version *ver
> +{
> + u32 rom_version = le32_to_cpu(ver->rom_version);
> + u16 flag = le16_to_cpu(ver->flag);
> +
> + if (((flag >> 8) & 0xff) == QCA_FLAG_MULTI_NVM) {
> + u16 board_id = le16_to_cpu(ver->board_id);
> + u32 ram_version = le32_to_cpu(ver->ram_version);
> + const char *variant;
> +
> + switch (ram_version) {
> + case WCN6855_2_0_RAM_VERSION_GF:
> + case WCN6855_2_1_RAM_VERSION_GF:
> + variant = "_gf";
> + break;
> + default:
> + variant = "";
instead of the default branch you could assign a default to 'variant' at
declaration time, but it's fine either way.
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + /* if boardid equal 0, use default nvm without suffix */
delete the comment, it just states the obvious
> + if (board_id == 0x0) {
nit: is there really any value in using a hex number here instead of a
plain decimal 0?
> + snprintf(fwname, max_size, "qca/nvm_usb_%08x%s.bin",
> + rom_version, variant);
> + } else {
> + snprintf(fwname, max_size, "qca/nvm_usb_%08x%s_%04x.bin",
> + rom_version, variant, board_id);
> + }
> + } else {
> + snprintf(fwname, max_size, "qca/nvm_usb_%08x.bin",
> + rom_version);
> + }
> +
> +}
> +
> static int btusb_setup_qca_load_nvm(struct hci_dev *hdev,
> struct qca_version *ver,
> const struct qca_device_info *info)
> @@ -3383,20 +3424,7 @@ static int btusb_setup_qca_load_nvm(struct hci_dev
> *hdev,
> char fwname[64];
> int err;
>
> - if (((ver->flag >> 8) & 0xff) == QCA_FLAG_MULTI_NVM) {
> - /* if boardid equal 0, use default nvm without surfix */
> - if (le16_to_cpu(ver->board_id) == 0x0) {
> - snprintf(fwname, sizeof(fwname), "qca/nvm_usb_%08x.bin",
> - le32_to_cpu(ver->rom_version));
> - } else {
> - snprintf(fwname, sizeof(fwname), "qca/nvm_usb_%08x_%04x.bin",
> - le32_to_cpu(ver->rom_version),
> - le16_to_cpu(ver->board_id));
> - }
> - } else {
> - snprintf(fwname, sizeof(fwname), "qca/nvm_usb_%08x.bin",
> - le32_to_cpu(ver->rom_version));
> - }
> + btusb_generate_qca_nvm_name(fwname, sizeof(fwname), ver);
>
> err = request_firmware(&fw, fwname, &hdev->dev);
> if (err) {
