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

[Arend Van Spriel <aspriel@gmail.com>]

On 12/2/2022 4:26 PM, Arend van Spriel wrote:
> 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@kernel.org> wrote:
>>>>>> Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 25.11.2022 12:53, Kalle Valo wrote:
>>>>>>>> Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org> writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 21.11.2022 14:56, Linus Walleij wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 5:47 PM Konrad Dybcio 
>>>>>>>>>> <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org> 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.

Actually realized you already provided a URL to the repo containing the 
firmware you used. So I had a look and it shows:

43596a0-roml/pcie-ag-apcs-pktctx-proptxstatus-ampduhostreorder-lpc-die3-olpc-pspretend-mfp-ltecx-clm_43xx_somc_mimo-phyflags-txpwrctrls-dpo 
Version: 9.75.119.15 (r691661) CRC: a6cf427b Date: Fri 2017-03-24 
13:24:25 KST Ucode Ver: 1060.20542 FWID: 01-e4abc35c

However, from firmware perspective this is equivalent to 4359c0 so I 
would suggest the change below.

Let me know if that works.

Regards,
Arend
---
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/pcie.c 
b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/pcie.c
index cf564adc612a..b59cf0f2939c 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/pcie.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/pcie.c
@@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ BRCMF_FW_CLM_DEF(4356, "brcmfmac4356-pcie");
  BRCMF_FW_CLM_DEF(43570, "brcmfmac43570-pcie");
  BRCMF_FW_DEF(4358, "brcmfmac4358-pcie");
  BRCMF_FW_DEF(4359, "brcmfmac4359-pcie");
+BCRMF_FW_DEF(4359C, "brcmfmac4359c-pcie");
  BRCMF_FW_DEF(4364, "brcmfmac4364-pcie");
  BRCMF_FW_DEF(4365B, "brcmfmac4365b-pcie");
  BRCMF_FW_DEF(4365C, "brcmfmac4365c-pcie");
@@ -83,7 +84,8 @@ static const struct brcmf_firmware_mapping 
brcmf_pcie_fwnames[] = {
  	BRCMF_FW_ENTRY(BRCM_CC_43569_CHIP_ID, 0xFFFFFFFF, 43570),
  	BRCMF_FW_ENTRY(BRCM_CC_43570_CHIP_ID, 0xFFFFFFFF, 43570),
  	BRCMF_FW_ENTRY(BRCM_CC_4358_CHIP_ID, 0xFFFFFFFF, 4358),
-	BRCMF_FW_ENTRY(BRCM_CC_4359_CHIP_ID, 0xFFFFFFFF, 4359),
+	BRCMF_FW_ENTRY(BRCM_CC_4359_CHIP_ID, 0x000001FF, 4359),
+	BRCMF_FW_ENTRY(BRCM_CC_4359_CHIP_ID, 0xFFFFFE00, 4359C),
  	BRCMF_FW_ENTRY(BRCM_CC_4364_CHIP_ID, 0xFFFFFFFF, 4364),
  	BRCMF_FW_ENTRY(BRCM_CC_4365_CHIP_ID, 0x0000000F, 4365B),
  	BRCMF_FW_ENTRY(BRCM_CC_4365_CHIP_ID, 0xFFFFFFF0, 4365C),