From: "Rafał Miłecki" <rafal@milecki.pl>
To: Arend Van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>
Cc: "Rafał Miłecki" <zajec5@gmail.com>,
"Ming Lei" <ming.lei@canonical.com>,
"Luis R . Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
"Greg KH" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Kalle Valo" <kvalo@codeaurora.org>,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
brcm80211-dev-list.pdl@broadcom.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/2] brcmfmac: don't warn user about NVRAM if fallback to platform one succeeds
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 10:32:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <31df911dc857c59b0d36e586f9542113@milecki.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <88182ec9-3344-7468-d3c3-33d9ffa532e2@broadcom.com>
On 2017-02-16 10:18, Arend Van Spriel wrote:
> On 16-2-2017 10:04, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>> On 2017-02-16 09:38, Arend Van Spriel wrote:
>>> On 16-2-2017 8:26, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>>>> From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
>>>>
>>>> Failing to load NVRAM file isn't critical if we manage to get
>>>> platform
>>>> one in the fallback path. It means warnings like:
>>>> [ 10.801506] brcmfmac 0000:01:00.0: Direct firmware load for
>>>> brcm/brcmfmac43602-pcie.txt failed with error -2
>>>> are unnecessary & disturbing for people with platform NVRAM. This is
>>>> very common case for Broadcom home routers.
>>>>
>>>> So instead of printing warning immediately with the firmware
>>>> subsystem
>>>> let's first try our fallback code. If that fails as well, then it's
>>>> a
>>>> right moment to print an error.
>>>>
>>>> This should reduce amount of false reports from users seeing this
>>>> warning while having wireless working perfectly fine.
>>>
>>> There are of course people with issues who take this warning as a
>>> straw
>>> to clutch.
>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
>>>> ---
>>>> V2: Update commit message as it wasn't clear enough (thanks Andy) &
>>>> add extra
>>>> messages to the firmware.c.
>>>>
>>>> Kalle, Arend: this patch is strictly related to the bigger 1/2.
>>>> Could
>>>> you ack
>>>> this change as I expect this patchset to be picked by Ming, Luis or
>>>> Greg?
>>>> ---
>>>> .../net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/firmware.c | 16
>>>> +++++++++++-----
>>>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git
>>>> a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/firmware.c
>>>> b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/firmware.c
>>>> index c7c1e9906500..510a76d99eee 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/firmware.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/firmware.c
>>>> @@ -462,8 +462,14 @@ static void brcmf_fw_request_nvram_done(const
>>>> struct firmware *fw, void *ctx)
>>>> raw_nvram = false;
>>>> } else {
>>>> data = bcm47xx_nvram_get_contents(&data_len);
>>>> - if (!data && !(fwctx->flags & BRCMF_FW_REQ_NV_OPTIONAL))
>>>> - goto fail;
>>>> + if (!data) {
>>>> + brcmf_dbg(TRACE, "Failed to get platform NVRAM\n");
>>>> + if (!(fwctx->flags & BRCMF_FW_REQ_NV_OPTIONAL)) {
>>>> + brcmf_err("Loading NVRAM from %s and using platform
>>>> one both failed\n",
>>>> + fwctx->nvram_name);
>>>> + goto fail;
>>>> + }
>>>> + }
>>>> raw_nvram = true;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> @@ -504,9 +510,9 @@ static void brcmf_fw_request_code_done(const
>>>> struct firmware *fw, void *ctx)
>>>> return;
>>>> }
>>>> fwctx->code = fw;
>>>> - ret = request_firmware_nowait(THIS_MODULE, true,
>>>> fwctx->nvram_name,
>>>> - fwctx->dev, GFP_KERNEL, fwctx,
>>>> - brcmf_fw_request_nvram_done);
>>>> + ret = request_firmware_async(THIS_MODULE, FW_OPT_NO_WARN,
>>>> + fwctx->nvram_name, fwctx->dev, GFP_KERNEL,
>>>> + fwctx, brcmf_fw_request_nvram_done);
>>>
>>> You changed the behaviour, because of your change in patch 1/2:
>>>
>>> - fw_work->opt_flags = FW_OPT_NOWAIT | FW_OPT_FALLBACK |
>>> - (uevent ? FW_OPT_UEVENT : FW_OPT_USERHELPER);
>>> + fw_work->opt_flags = FW_OPT_NOWAIT | opt_flags;
>>>
>>> So: (FW_OPT_NOWAIT | FW_OPT_UEVENT) vs (FW_OPT_NOWAIT |
>>> FW_OPT_NO_WARN)
>>
>> Sorry, I didn't realize brcmfmac needs FW_OPT_UEVENT. I'll re-add it
>> in
>> V3, just
>> let me wait to see if there will be more comments.
>
> To be honest whether or not FW_OPT_UEVENT is needed should not be
> something a driver needs to concern about. It is really a system
> configuration issue if you ask me. So the only thing we could do is to
> have it just in case.
Drivers always got a choice (see bool uevent) so I didn't want to change
it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-02-16 9:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-02-15 22:29 [PATCH 1/2] firmware: add more flexible request_firmware_async function Rafał Miłecki
2017-02-15 22:29 ` [PATCH 2/2] brcmfmac: don't warn user if loading firmware file with NVRAM fails Rafał Miłecki
2017-02-16 1:19 ` Andy Shevchenko
2017-02-16 7:25 ` Rafał Miłecki
2017-02-16 7:26 ` [PATCH V2 1/2] firmware: add more flexible request_firmware_async function Rafał Miłecki
2017-02-16 7:26 ` [PATCH V2 2/2] brcmfmac: don't warn user about NVRAM if fallback to platform one succeeds Rafał Miłecki
2017-02-16 8:38 ` Arend Van Spriel
2017-02-16 9:04 ` Rafał Miłecki
2017-02-16 9:18 ` Arend Van Spriel
2017-02-16 9:32 ` Rafał Miłecki [this message]
2017-02-16 10:17 ` Arend Van Spriel
2017-02-21 9:47 ` [PATCH V3 1/2] firmware: add more flexible request_firmware_async function Rafał Miłecki
2017-02-21 9:47 ` [PATCH V3 2/2] brcmfmac: don't warn user about NVRAM if fallback to platform one succeeds Rafał Miłecki
2017-02-21 9:57 ` Arend Van Spriel
2017-02-21 11:46 ` Kalle Valo
2017-02-21 18:04 ` [PATCH V3 1/2] firmware: add more flexible request_firmware_async function Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-02-23 18:30 ` [PATCH V4 " Rafał Miłecki
2017-02-23 18:30 ` [PATCH V4 2/2] brcmfmac: don't warn user about NVRAM if fallback to platform one succeeds Rafał Miłecki
2017-03-16 9:57 ` [PATCH V4 1/2] firmware: add more flexible request_firmware_async function Rafał Miłecki
2017-03-16 13:31 ` Greg KH
2017-03-16 13:55 ` Rafał Miłecki
2017-03-16 14:03 ` Greg KH
2017-03-17 17:29 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-03-27 19:28 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-02-21 18:02 ` [PATCH V2 " Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-02-21 17:59 ` [PATCH " Luis R. Rodriguez
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=31df911dc857c59b0d36e586f9542113@milecki.pl \
--to=rafal@milecki.pl \
--cc=arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com \
--cc=brcm80211-dev-list.pdl@broadcom.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=kvalo@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@canonical.com \
--cc=zajec5@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).