From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
To: Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>
Cc: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>,
Arend van Spriel <aspriel@gmail.com>,
Franky Lin <franky.lin@broadcom.com>,
Hante Meuleman <hante.meuleman@broadcom.com>,
Chi-hsien Lin <chi-hsien.lin@infineon.com>,
Wright Feng <wright.feng@infineon.com>,
Chung-hsien Hsu <chung-hsien.hsu@infineon.com>,
linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>,
phone-devel@vger.kernel.org, newbyte@disroot.org,
Stephan Gerhold <stephan@gerhold.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] brcmfmac: firmware: Allow per-board firmware binaries
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2021 11:35:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdYSXmPO0zGfFbmg3dHrv30sTzQcaGW-vbVV+L1NNS3MqA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a2ee7f03-879e-543f-fbaf-06a58e416e9d@broadcom.com>
On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 10:48 AM Arend van Spriel
<arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com> wrote:
> Right. I didn't get to looking at this earlier, but indeed the check
> whether the requested firmware exists is done in another thread context
> so the return value here only indicates whether the firmware request
> could be scheduled or not.
I think my recent patch fixes is, please have a look.
> My first reaction to the patch was to reject it, but leaning towards
> supporting this now. OEMs tend to get tailor-made firmware in terms of
> features. Depending on their requirements they get their mix of firmware
> features. That such difference lead to a crash in 3d engine is somewhat
> surprising. I am curious if we can debug this more and learn how a
> firmware variant could cause such a crash. Maybe some DMA issue?
I am not certain what happens, but I think the 3D engine misses its
interrupts. This may in turn be because GPIO IRQs are held
low or fireing repeatedly for an extensive period of time, stressing
the system to the point that other important IRQs are missed.
This in turn can be caused by the wrong (non-custom) firmware
managing these GPIO IRQs fireing left and right.
I have noticed that the config files for brcmfmac contain words
about GPIOs and so on and that is what makes me think this way.
I can tell for sure that brcmfmac has definately had special
firmware tailored by/for Samsung for these phones. We can just
look at the files extracted from the platforms (the original
files are named bcmdhd_sta.bin_b2 or similar):
BRCMFMAC 4330
-rw-r--r--. 1 linus linus 213390 Mar 22 23:32
brcmfmac4330-sdio.samsung,janice.bin
-rw-r--r--. 1 linus linus 203593 Jul 11 01:53
brcmfmac4330-sdio.samsung,codina.bin
-rw-r--r--. 1 linus linus 212956 Mar 22 23:31
brcmfmac4330-sdio.samsung,gavini.bin
BRCMFMAC 4334
-rw-r--r--. 1 linus linus 346151 Mar 16 22:53
brcmfmac4334-sdio.samsung,golden.bin
-rw-r--r--. 1 linus linus 434236 Jul 7 00:43 brcmfmac4334-sdio.samsung,kyle.bin
-rw-r--r--. 1 linus linus 434236 Mar 16 22:54
brcmfmac4334-sdio.samsung,skomer.bin
All different file sizes, except Kyle and Skomer, who actually share
the same firmware. (Those were the two last phones produced
in this series BTW.) Doing strings * on each file reveals that they
were compiled at different dates around the time these phones
were produced.
These are all for standard WiFi functionality. There is two more
firmwares for each phone, one for the access point usecase and
one more which I don't know what it is for, the actual set of firmware
for each phone is for example (Skomer):
bcmdhd_apsta.bin_b2
bcmdhd_mfg.bin_b2
bcmdhd_p2p.bin_b2
bcmdhd_sta.bin_b2
So I am half-guessing that bcmdhd_sta.bin_b2 is obviously for the
ordinary use case, *mfg* is probably for manufacturing, *apsta*
for mobile hotspot (access point) and *p2p* for some other cool
thing where phones do peer-to-peer.
If you could shed some light on the above it'd be great :)
Yours,
Linus Walleij
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-04 9:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-11 23:16 [PATCH] brcmfmac: firmware: Allow per-board firmware binaries Linus Walleij
2021-07-30 9:21 ` Linus Walleij
2021-07-30 17:58 ` Kalle Valo
2021-08-01 10:27 ` Kalle Valo
2021-08-03 15:28 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2021-08-03 15:53 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2021-08-03 23:28 ` Linus Walleij
2021-08-04 8:48 ` Arend van Spriel
2021-08-04 9:35 ` Linus Walleij [this message]
2021-08-04 11:32 ` Arend van Spriel
2021-08-04 19:18 ` Linus Walleij
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=CACRpkdYSXmPO0zGfFbmg3dHrv30sTzQcaGW-vbVV+L1NNS3MqA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com \
--cc=aspriel@gmail.com \
--cc=chi-hsien.lin@infineon.com \
--cc=chung-hsien.hsu@infineon.com \
--cc=digetx@gmail.com \
--cc=franky.lin@broadcom.com \
--cc=hante.meuleman@broadcom.com \
--cc=kvalo@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=newbyte@disroot.org \
--cc=phone-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stephan@gerhold.net \
--cc=wright.feng@infineon.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.