On 12/2/2022 11:33 AM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
On 1.12.2022 12:31, Arend van Spriel wrote:On 11/28/2022 3:40 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:On 26.11.2022 22:45, Linus Walleij wrote:On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 1:25 PM Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:On 25.11.2022 12:53, Kalle Valo wrote:Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:On 21.11.2022 14:56, Linus Walleij wrote:On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 5:47 PM Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:I can think of a couple of hacky ways to force use of 43596 fw, but I don't think any would be really upstreamable..If it is only known to affect the Sony Xperias mentioned then a thing such as: if (of_machine_is_compatible("sony,xyz") || of_machine_is_compatible("sony,zzz")... ) { // Enforce FW version } would be completely acceptable in my book. It hammers the problem from the top instead of trying to figure out itsy witsy details about firmware revisions. Yours, Linus WalleijActually, I think I came up with a better approach by pulling a page out of Asahi folks' book - please take a look and tell me what you think about this: [1] https://github.com/SoMainline/linux/commit/4b6fccc995cd79109b0dae4e4ab2e48db97695e7 [2] https://github.com/SoMainline/linux/commit/e3ea1dc739634f734104f37fdbed046873921af7Something in this direction works too. The upside is that it tells all operating systems how to deal with the firmware for this hardware.Instead of a directory path ("brcm/brcmfmac43596-pcie") why not provide just the chipset name ("brcmfmac43596-pcie")? IMHO it's unnecessary to have directory names in Device Tree.I think it's common practice to include a full $FIRMWARE_DIR-relative path when specifying firmware in DT, though here I left out the board name bit as that's assigned dynamically anyway. That said, if you don't like it, I can change it.It's just that I have understood that Device Tree is supposed to describe hardware and to me a firmware directory "brcm/" is a software property, not a hardware property. But this is really for the Device Tree maintainers to decide, they know this best :)I would personally just minimize the amount of information put into the device tree to be exactly what is needed to find the right firmware. brcm,firmware-compatible = "43596"; since the code already knows how to conjure the rest of the string. But check with Rob/Krzysztof. Yours, Linus WalleijKrzysztof, Rob [added to CC] - can I have your opinions?I tried catching up on this thread. Reading it I am not sure what the issue is, but I am happy to dive in. If you can provide a boot log with brcmfmac loaded with module parameter 'debug=0x1416' I can try and make sense of the chipid/devid confusion.Hope this helps, thanks! https://hastebin.com/xidagekuge.yaml
It does to some extent. It is basically a 4359 revision 9: [ 25.898782] brcmfmac: brcmf_chip_recognition found AXI chip: BCM4359/9The 4359 entry in pcie.c is applicable for revision 0 and higher (doubtful but that is in the code):
BRCMF_FW_ENTRY(BRCM_CC_4359_CHIP_ID, 0xFFFFFFFF, 4359),We need to change the mask above to 0x000001FF and add a new entry with mask 0xFFFFFE00. All we need is come up with a reasonable firmware filename. So can you run the strings command on the firmware you use:
$ strings fw.bin | tail -1 and let me know the output. Regards, Arend So for rev 9 we need a new entry
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
