Bjorn Andersson [off-list ref] writes:
On Mon 08 Feb 11:21 CST 2021, Kalle Valo wrote:
quoted
Amit Pundir [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Hi Kalle,
On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 at 22:25, Kalle Valo [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
This is firmware version specific, right? There's also enum
ath10k_fw_features which is embedded within firmware-N.bin, we could add
a new flag there. But that means that a correct firmware-N.bin is needed
for each firmware version, not sure if that would work out. Just
throwing out ideas here.
Apologies for this late reply. I was out for a while.
No worries.
quoted
If by that (the firmware version) you mean "QC_IMAGE_VERSION_STRING",
then that may be a bit tricky. Pocophone F1 use the same firmware
family version (WLAN.HL.2.0.XXX), used by Dragonboard 845c (which has
Wi-Fi working upstream).
I'm meaning the ath10k firmware meta data we have in firmware-N.bin
(N=2,3,4...) file. A quick summary:
Every ath10k firmware release should have firmware-N.bin. The file is
created with this tool:
https://github.com/qca/qca-swiss-army-knife/blob/master/tools/scripts/ath10k/ath10k-fwencoder
firmware-N.bin contains various metadata, one of those being firmware
feature flags:
enum ath10k_fw_features {
/* wmi_mgmt_rx_hdr contains extra RSSI information */
ATH10K_FW_FEATURE_EXT_WMI_MGMT_RX = 0,
/* Firmware from 10X branch. Deprecated, don't use in new code. */
ATH10K_FW_FEATURE_WMI_10X = 1,
[...]
So what you could is add a new flag enum ath10k_fw_features, create a
new firmware-N.bin for your device and enable the flag on the firmware
releases for your device only.
I don't know if this is usable, but one solution which came to my mind.
It sounds quite reasonable to pass this using firmawre-N.bin instead of
DT, however that would imply that we need to find firmware-N.bin in the
device-specific directory, where we keep the wlanmdsp.mbn as well - and
not under /lib/firmware/ath10k
For other devices (e.g. ADSP, modem or wlanmdsp.mbn) we're putting these
in e.g. /lib/firmware/qcom/LENOVO/81JL/ and specifies the location using
a firmware-name property in DT.
Ah, I didn't realise that.
Actually I would like to have ath10k in control[1] of QMI/rproc firmware
loading as the firmware releases have different constraints, like the
issue we are now discussing. Ideally firmware-N.bin would contain all
firmware files, for example wlanmdsp.mbn, and from the meta data
ath10k/ath11k would know what version of the firmware interface should
be used.
I remember we discussed this briefly a year or two ago and there was no
easy solution, but I really wish we could find one. More these kind of
firmware interface incompatibilities will most likely pop up, also in
ath11k, so it would be great to find a clean and easily maneagable
solution.
[1] With control I mean that ath10k/ath11k can choose which firmware
should be loaded
--
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
Hi,
Reviving this old thread again, to check if there are still any hopes
of landing this patch upstream.
Based on the feedback I have got so far, there are no easy way to skip
this part of the initialization at runtime. Bjorn and Kalle discussed
the possibility of creating device specific firmware-N.bin firmware
file but that would mean firmware-N.bin has to be loaded from the
device-specific directory along with wlanmdsp.bin. And ideally making
ath10k/ath11k in-charge of firmware loading, but there doesn't seem to
be a consensus on this either(?)
Regards,
Amit Pundir
On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 at 13:41, Kalle Valo [off-list ref] wrote:
Bjorn Andersson [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
On Mon 08 Feb 11:21 CST 2021, Kalle Valo wrote:
quoted
Amit Pundir [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Hi Kalle,
On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 at 22:25, Kalle Valo [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
This is firmware version specific, right? There's also enum
ath10k_fw_features which is embedded within firmware-N.bin, we could add
a new flag there. But that means that a correct firmware-N.bin is needed
for each firmware version, not sure if that would work out. Just
throwing out ideas here.
Apologies for this late reply. I was out for a while.
No worries.
quoted
If by that (the firmware version) you mean "QC_IMAGE_VERSION_STRING",
then that may be a bit tricky. Pocophone F1 use the same firmware
family version (WLAN.HL.2.0.XXX), used by Dragonboard 845c (which has
Wi-Fi working upstream).
I'm meaning the ath10k firmware meta data we have in firmware-N.bin
(N=2,3,4...) file. A quick summary:
Every ath10k firmware release should have firmware-N.bin. The file is
created with this tool:
https://github.com/qca/qca-swiss-army-knife/blob/master/tools/scripts/ath10k/ath10k-fwencoder
firmware-N.bin contains various metadata, one of those being firmware
feature flags:
enum ath10k_fw_features {
/* wmi_mgmt_rx_hdr contains extra RSSI information */
ATH10K_FW_FEATURE_EXT_WMI_MGMT_RX = 0,
/* Firmware from 10X branch. Deprecated, don't use in new code. */
ATH10K_FW_FEATURE_WMI_10X = 1,
[...]
So what you could is add a new flag enum ath10k_fw_features, create a
new firmware-N.bin for your device and enable the flag on the firmware
releases for your device only.
I don't know if this is usable, but one solution which came to my mind.
It sounds quite reasonable to pass this using firmawre-N.bin instead of
DT, however that would imply that we need to find firmware-N.bin in the
device-specific directory, where we keep the wlanmdsp.mbn as well - and
not under /lib/firmware/ath10k
For other devices (e.g. ADSP, modem or wlanmdsp.mbn) we're putting these
in e.g. /lib/firmware/qcom/LENOVO/81JL/ and specifies the location using
a firmware-name property in DT.
Ah, I didn't realise that.
Actually I would like to have ath10k in control[1] of QMI/rproc firmware
loading as the firmware releases have different constraints, like the
issue we are now discussing. Ideally firmware-N.bin would contain all
firmware files, for example wlanmdsp.mbn, and from the meta data
ath10k/ath11k would know what version of the firmware interface should
be used.
I remember we discussed this briefly a year or two ago and there was no
easy solution, but I really wish we could find one. More these kind of
firmware interface incompatibilities will most likely pop up, also in
ath11k, so it would be great to find a clean and easily maneagable
solution.
[1] With control I mean that ath10k/ath11k can choose which firmware
should be loaded
--
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches