Re: [EXT] Re: mwifiex cmd timeout on one pci variant

[Dominique MARTINET <dominique.martinet@atmark-techno.com>]

Hi Jonas,

Jonas Dreßler wrote on Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 12:11:46PM +0200:
> regarding the firmware version, as you can see in the commit updating the
> firmware binaries (https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/firmware/linux-firmware.git/commit/mrvl/pcie8897_uapsta.bin?id=1a5773c0c89ee44cee51a285d5c7c1063cdb0891),
> indeed the version numbering differs between the different versions of the
> card (usb/usb, pcie/usb, pcie/uart(?)).

Right. The update frequency is also quite different, so I'm assuming the
pcie/uart version I'm using has a lot of vulnerabilities left open as
well...


> Anyway, if you manage to find newer firmware for any of those versions, I'd
> be happy if you could point me to that, apparently they just fixed a
> critical vulnerability in the Windows firmware again (see https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/surface/surface-pro-5th-gen-update-history-5203144a-90c1-63df-ce0b-7ec7ff32ff10),
> I wouldn't be surprised if our firmware is also affected by that.

That sounds like a safe bet..
I assume the firmwares are not compatible and we can't just load these?


> About the command timeout, I have no idea why the fix isn't working for you,
> but well, my analysis of the issue is also just a (not exactly educated)
> guess, so it might as well be a completely different problem and my fix is
> just a lucky hack.

Right, it really depends on why the firmware crashed, but we have no way
of investigating that at the moment.

> I'd kinda hope though that my proposed patches finally wake up some people
> at NXP and motivate them to take a look at that firmware repo again.

If it works well enough it could be a reason not to bother :D
Alternatively if they can't spend time on it maybe open the firmware
code (under NDA? my company probably already has one with NXP..), but
my problem will need more time to reach them through regular channels.

-- 
Dominique