From: Daniel Drake <drake@endlessm.com>
To: Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com>
Cc: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>,
Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@gmail.com>,
Linux Bluetooth mailing list <linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Bluetooth: btrtl: Skip initialization if firmware is already loaded
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2019 08:55:20 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAD8Lp47YpoVeDheK3pi0CcSJTdh2jSVcM8V9T_zmu=7deXszOw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190124152310.29717-3-kai.heng.feng@canonical.com>
On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 11:23 PM Kai-Heng Feng
<kai.heng.feng@canonical.com> wrote:
> Realtek bluetooth may not work after reboot:
> [ 12.446130] Bluetooth: hci0: RTL: rtl: unknown IC info, lmp subver a99e, hci rev 826c, hci ver 0008
>
> The power is not cut during system reboot, so the firmware is kept in
> Bluetooth controller.
>
> Realtek bluetooth doesn't have the ability to check firmware loading
> status. but the version queried by HCI_OP_READ_LOCAL_VERSION will be
> different if firmware is already loaded. Realtek's own fork, rtk_btusb
> also use this method to detect the loading status.
>
> So let's assume the firmware is already loaded when we can't find
> matching IC info.
This logic was already present in the driver - but it looks like this
regressed at this point:
commit 26503ad25de8c7c93a2037f919c2e49a62cf65f1
Author: Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
Date: Thu Aug 2 16:57:13 2018 +0200
Bluetooth: btrtl: split the device initialization into smaller parts
After your patch it is effectively there in two places now, since it
is also in btrtl_download_firmware() (although not really effective
after the above commit). I wonder if that can be cleaned up to avoid
duplication.
Regarding the other patches that move away from the style of returning
either a useful value or an error, is this purely a stylistic thing or
is it needed for your 3rd patch? I don't have strong feelings either
way but I have the impression that the currently implemented approach
is a common style within kernel code and I don't see benefit in
splitting off a separate out parameter.
Daniel
> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=201921
> Signed-off-by: Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com>
> ---
> drivers/bluetooth/btrtl.c | 10 ++++++----
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/bluetooth/btrtl.c b/drivers/bluetooth/btrtl.c
> index c36f500d8313..e2f89d57dd14 100644
> --- a/drivers/bluetooth/btrtl.c
> +++ b/drivers/bluetooth/btrtl.c
> @@ -546,9 +546,10 @@ int btrtl_initialize(struct hci_dev *hdev,
> hdev->bus);
>
> if (!btrtl_dev->ic_info) {
> - rtl_dev_err(hdev, "rtl: unknown IC info, lmp subver %04x, hci rev %04x, hci ver %04x",
> - lmp_subver, hci_rev, hci_ver);
> - return -EINVAL;
> + rtl_dev_info(hdev, "rtl: unknown IC info, lmp subver %04x, hci rev %04x, hci ver %04x",
> + lmp_subver, hci_rev, hci_ver);
> + rtl_dev_info(hdev, "rtl: firmware may be already loaded, or it's an unsupported IC.");
> + return 0;
> }
>
> if (btrtl_dev->ic_info->has_rom_version) {
> @@ -621,7 +622,8 @@ int btrtl_setup_realtek(struct hci_dev *hdev)
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> - ret = btrtl_download_firmware(hdev, &btrtl_dev);
> + if (btrtl_dev.ic_info)
> + ret = btrtl_download_firmware(hdev, &btrtl_dev);
>
> return ret;
> }
> --
> 2.17.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-25 0:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-24 15:23 [PATCH 1/3] Bluetooth: btrtl: Let rtl_load_file() always return error code Kai-Heng Feng
2019-01-24 15:23 ` [PATCH 2/3] Bluetooth: btrtl: Let btrtl_initialize() " Kai-Heng Feng
2019-01-24 15:23 ` [PATCH 3/3] Bluetooth: btrtl: Skip initialization if firmware is already loaded Kai-Heng Feng
2019-01-25 0:55 ` Daniel Drake [this message]
2019-01-25 17:46 ` Kai-Heng Feng
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='CAD8Lp47YpoVeDheK3pi0CcSJTdh2jSVcM8V9T_zmu=7deXszOw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=drake@endlessm.com \
--cc=johan.hedberg@gmail.com \
--cc=kai.heng.feng@canonical.com \
--cc=linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcel@holtmann.org \
--cc=martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.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).