lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Nov]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] brcmfmac: Add support for BCM43596 PCIe Wi-Fi
From


On 26/09/2022 11:27, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Alvin Šipraga <ALSI@bang-olufsen.dk> writes:
>
>> On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 03:02:12PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 12:21 PM Konrad Dybcio
>>> <konrad.dybcio@somainline.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Also worth noting is the 'somc' bit, meaning there are probably *some* SONY
>>>> customizations, but that's also just a guess.
>>>
>>> What I have seen from BRCM customizations on Samsung phones is that
>>> the per-device customization of firmware seems to involve the set-up of
>>> some GPIO and power management pins. For example if integrated with
>>> an SoC that has autonomous system resume, or if some GPIO line has
>>> to be pulled to enable an external regulator or PA.
>>
>> At least with Infineon (formerly Cypress), as a customer you might get a
>> private firmware and this will be maintained internally by them on a
>> separate customer branch. Any subsequent bugfixes or feature requests
>> will usually be applied to that customer branch and a new firmware built
>> from it. I think their internal "mainline" branch might get merged into
>> the customer branches from time to time, but this seems to be done on an
>> ad-hoc basis. This is our experience at least.
>>
>> I would also point out that the BCM4359 is equivalent to the
>> CYW88359/CYW89359 chipset, which we are using in some of our
>> products. Note that this is a Cypress chipset (identifiable by the
>> Version: ... (... CY) tag in the version string). But the FW Konrad is
>> linking appears to be for a Broadcom chipset.
>>
>> FYI, here's a publicly available set of firmware files for the '4359:
>>
>> https://github.com/NXP/imx-firmware/tree/master/cyw-wifi-bt/1FD_CYW4359
>>
>> Anyway, I would second Hector's suggestion and make this a separate FW.
>
> I also recommend having a separate firmware filename. Like Hector said,
> it's easy to have a symlink in userspace if same binary can be used.
So, I dusted off this patch and tried to change the fw name, only to
discover that the BRCM_PCIE_43596_DEVICE_ID is equal to
CY_PCIE_89459_DEVICE_ID, (which btw uses 4355/89459 fw), but then it
makes the driver expect 4359/9 based on rev matching, so... the 43596
chip ID may be a lie? Or at least for the one used in my particular
device? I'm beyond confused now..

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..

Any thoughts?

Konrad

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-11-18 17:48    [W:0.312 / U:0.088 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site