Re: [PATCH v2] brcmfmac: Add support for BCM43596 PCIe Wi-Fi

From: Arend van Spriel
Date: Fri Dec 02 2022 - 10:26:58 EST

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 Walleij

Actually, 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/e3ea1dc739634f734104f37fdbed046873921af7

Something 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 Walleij

Krzysztof, 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: BCM4359/9

The 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