On 5 January 2017 at 10:50, Arend Van Spriel
<arend.vanspriel@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 3-1-2017 17:11, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>> From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Every new firmware API will most likely require changes in our code to
>> support it. Right now we support 2 versions only. Refuse to init if we
>> detect newer version.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> Hi Arend,
>>
>> I think you were concerned about possible firmware API changes. Please
>> review this patch, I hope it's a proper check for running unsupported
>> firmware version which could result in broken communication between host
>> driver and a device.
>> ---
>> drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c | 5 +++++
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c
>> index 0babfc7..c69ae84 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c
>> @@ -6816,6 +6816,11 @@ struct brcmf_cfg80211_info *brcmf_cfg80211_attach(struct brcmf_pub *drvr,
>> brcmf_err("Failed to get D11 version (%d)\n", err);
>> goto priv_out;
>> }
>> + if (io_type > BRCMU_D11AC_IOTYPE) {
>> + brcmf_err("Unsupported IO version %d\n", io_type);
>> + goto priv_out;
>> + }
>
> I prefer to have this in brcmu_d11_attach() and have it return an error.
My too, but since you made brcmu_d11_attach part of *utils* and new IO
version support may require driver changes, I didn't want to mess
these two.
If it was up to me, I would keep brcmu_d11_attach in brcmfmac code and
then add a proper check in this function indeed.
Is there any reason you made brcmu_d11_attach part of utils?
