On 3/5/2023 7:00 AM, Stefan Wahren wrote:
Hi,
Am 03.03.23 um 18:22 schrieb Florian Fainelli:
On 3/3/23 03:57, Stefan Wahren wrote:
Hi,
Am 02.03.23 um 18:51 schrieb Florian Fainelli:
On 3/2/2023 9:20 AM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 9:01 AM Stefan Wahren
<stefan.wahren@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Saravana,
Am 02.03.23 um 03:35 schrieb Saravana Kannan:
This allow fw_devlink to do dependency tracking for serdev devices.
Reported-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@xxxxxxxxx>
Link:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/03b70a8a-0591-f28b-a567-9d2f736f17e5@xxxxxxxxx/
Cc: Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@xxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@xxxxxxxxxx>
since this fixes an issue on Raspberry Pi 4, shouldn't this be
mentioned
in the commit message and providing a Fixes tag?
So RPi 4 was never creating a device links between serdev devices and
their consumers. The error message was just a new one I added and we
are noticing and catching the fact that serdev wasn't setting fwnode
for a device.
I'm also not sure if I can say this commit "Fixes" an issue in serdev
core because when serdev core was written, fw_devlink wasn't a thing.
Once I add Fixes, people will start pulling this into stable
branches/other trees where I don't think this should be pulled into
older stable branches.
That is kind of the point of Fixes: tag, is not it? It is
appropriate to list a commit that is not specific to serdev, but
maybe a particular point into the fw_devlink history. Given this did
not appear to have a functional impact, we could go without one.
i was under the impression that this issue breaks at least Bluetooth
on Raspberry Pi 4 because the driver is never probed. I cannot see
the success output in Florian's trace. Something like this:
[ 7.124879] hci_uart_bcm serial0-0: supply vbat not found, using
dummy regulator
[ 7.131743] hci_uart_bcm serial0-0: supply vddio not found, using
dummy regulator
...
[ 7.517249] Bluetooth: hci0: BCM: chip id 107
[ 7.517499] Bluetooth: hci0: BCM: features 0x2f
[ 7.519757] Bluetooth: hci0: BCM4345C0
[ 7.519768] Bluetooth: hci0: BCM4345C0 (003.001.025) build 0000
[ 7.539495] Bluetooth: hci0: BCM4345C0 'brcm/BCM4345C0.hcd' Patch
...
[ 8.348831] Bluetooth: hci0: BCM43455 37.4MHz Raspberry Pi 3+
[ 8.348845] Bluetooth: hci0: BCM4345C0 (003.001.025) build 0342
I just want to make sure that 6.2 doesn't have a regression.
My configuration uses hci_uart as a module, and it would always load
fine, but I suppose I can make sure that even built-in this works
properly. Give me a day or two to test that.
okay, this is fine. From my point of view this is not necessary to test
built-in.
I tested latest mainline with Raspberry Pi 4 (multi_v7_defconfig +
ARM_LPAE) and there is no regression:
Tested-by: Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@xxxxxxxx>
Tested with making the BT drivers built-in with and without the patch
and it still worked OK in both cases.
--
Florian
