lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Feb]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH V2 2/2] brcmfmac: don't warn user about NVRAM if fallback to platform one succeeds
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.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-02-16 11:22    [W:0.073 / U:0.380 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site