Re: [PATCH v5] Bluetooth: btusb: Add support using different nvm for variant WCN6855 controller
From: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org>
Date: 2021-08-24 09:12:05
Also in:
linux-arm-msm, lkml
On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 04:28:03PM +0800, Zijun Hu wrote:
From: Tim Jiang <redacted> we have variant wcn6855 soc chip from different foundries, so we should use different nvm file with suffix to distinguish them.
Similar question as on v4: why is it necessary to know where a chip was manufactured? Is the hardware different? Should the FW behave differently for some reason (e.g. regulatory differences)?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Signed-off-by: Tim Jiang <redacted> --- drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c | 57 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)diff --git a/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c b/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c index 60d2fce59a71..ad7734f8917c 100644 --- a/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c +++ b/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c@@ -3141,6 +3141,9 @@ 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;@@ -3172,6 +3175,7 @@ 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,@@ -3326,27 +3330,56 @@ static int btusb_setup_qca_load_rampatch(struct hci_dev *hdev, return err; } -static int btusb_setup_qca_load_nvm(struct hci_dev *hdev, - struct qca_version *ver, - const struct qca_device_info *info) +static void btusb_generate_qca_nvm_name(char **fwname, + int max_size, + struct qca_version *ver, + char *foundry) { - const struct firmware *fw; - char fwname[64]; - int err; + char *separator; + u16 board_id; + u32 rom_version; + + separator = (foundry == NULL) ? "" : "_"; + board_id = le16_to_cpu(ver->board_id); + rom_version = le32_to_cpu(ver->rom_version);
Make the above assignments in the declaration.
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));
+ snprintf(fwname, sizeof(fwname), "qca/nvm_usb_%08x%s%s.bin",
+ rom_version,
+ separator,
+ foundry);the last three parameters could be in a single line.
} else {
- snprintf(fwname, sizeof(fwname), "qca/nvm_usb_%08x_%04x.bin",
- le32_to_cpu(ver->rom_version),
- le16_to_cpu(ver->board_id));
+ snprintf(fwname, sizeof(fwname), "qca/nvm_usb_%08x%s%s%04x.bin",
+ rom_version,
+ separator,
+ foundry,
+ board_id);the last four parameters could be in a single line. Besides the minor comments above this looks good to me in terms of code, but I'd like to have a better understanding of why the origin of the chip is important.