On 4/24/24 6:22 AM, quic_zijuhu wrote:
> On 4/24/2024 9:18 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>> On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 at 15:10, Wren Turkal <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 4/24/24 5:29 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski<[email protected]>
>>>>
>>>> Any return value from gpiod_get_optional() other than a pointer to a
>>>> GPIO descriptor or a NULL-pointer is an error and the driver should
>>>> abort probing. That being said: commit 56d074d26c58 ("Bluetooth: hci_qca:
>>>> don't use IS_ERR_OR_NULL() with gpiod_get_optional()") no longer sets
>>>> power_ctrl_enabled on NULL-pointer returned by
>>>> devm_gpiod_get_optional(). Restore this behavior but bail-out on errors.
>>>> While at it: also bail-out on error returned when trying to get the
>>>> "swctrl" GPIO.
>>>>
>>>> Reported-by: Wren Turkal<[email protected]>
>>>> Reported-by: Zijun Hu<[email protected]>
>>>> Closes:https://lore.kernel.org/linux-bluetooth/[email protected]/
>>>> Fixes: 56d074d26c58 ("Bluetooth: hci_qca: don't use IS_ERR_OR_NULL() with gpiod_get_optional()")
>>>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski<[email protected]>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski<[email protected]>
>>>
>>> Tested-by: "Wren Turkal" <[email protected]>
>>>
>>>
>>> Like this?
>>
>> Yes, awesome, thanks.
>>
>> This is how reviewing works too in the kernel, look at what Krzysztof
>> did under v1, he just wrote:
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski<[email protected]>
>>
> v1 have obvious something wrong as i pointed and verified.
> so i think it is not suitable to attach v1's review-by tag to v2 anyway.
@Zijun, your concern is that current DTs may not define the gpio and
this will cause the bluetooth not to work?
Would that not more appropriately be fixed by machine-specific fixups
for the DT?
>
>> And mailing list tools will pick it up.
>>
>> Bartosz
>
--
You're more amazing than you think!
On 4/24/2024 9:31 PM, Wren Turkal wrote:
> On 4/24/24 6:22 AM, quic_zijuhu wrote:
>> On 4/24/2024 9:18 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>> On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 at 15:10, Wren Turkal <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 4/24/24 5:29 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>>>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski<[email protected]>
>>>>>
>>>>> Any return value from gpiod_get_optional() other than a pointer to a
>>>>> GPIO descriptor or a NULL-pointer is an error and the driver should
>>>>> abort probing. That being said: commit 56d074d26c58 ("Bluetooth:
>>>>> hci_qca:
>>>>> don't use IS_ERR_OR_NULL() with gpiod_get_optional()") no longer sets
>>>>> power_ctrl_enabled on NULL-pointer returned by
>>>>> devm_gpiod_get_optional(). Restore this behavior but bail-out on
>>>>> errors.
>>>>> While at it: also bail-out on error returned when trying to get the
>>>>> "swctrl" GPIO.
>>>>>
>>>>> Reported-by: Wren Turkal<[email protected]>
>>>>> Reported-by: Zijun Hu<[email protected]>
>>>>> Closes:https://lore.kernel.org/linux-bluetooth/[email protected]/
>>>>> Fixes: 56d074d26c58 ("Bluetooth: hci_qca: don't use
>>>>> IS_ERR_OR_NULL() with gpiod_get_optional()")
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski<[email protected]>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski<[email protected]>
>>>>
>>>> Tested-by: "Wren Turkal" <[email protected]>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Like this?
>>>
>>> Yes, awesome, thanks.
>>>
>>> This is how reviewing works too in the kernel, look at what Krzysztof
>>> did under v1, he just wrote:
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski<[email protected]>
>>>
>> v1 have obvious something wrong as i pointed and verified.
>> so i think it is not suitable to attach v1's review-by tag to v2 anyway.
>
> @Zijun, your concern is that current DTs may not define the gpio and
> this will cause the bluetooth not to work?
>
> Would that not more appropriately be fixed by machine-specific fixups
> for the DT?
>
for lunched production, it is difficult or not possible to change such
config.
>>
>>> And mailing list tools will pick it up.
>>>
>>> Bartosz
>>
>
On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 3:31 PM Wren Turkal <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 4/24/24 6:22 AM, quic_zijuhu wrote:
> > On 4/24/2024 9:18 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> >> On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 at 15:10, Wren Turkal <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 4/24/24 5:29 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> >>>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski<[email protected]>
> >>>>
> >>>> Any return value from gpiod_get_optional() other than a pointer to a
> >>>> GPIO descriptor or a NULL-pointer is an error and the driver should
> >>>> abort probing. That being said: commit 56d074d26c58 ("Bluetooth: hci_qca:
> >>>> don't use IS_ERR_OR_NULL() with gpiod_get_optional()") no longer sets
> >>>> power_ctrl_enabled on NULL-pointer returned by
> >>>> devm_gpiod_get_optional(). Restore this behavior but bail-out on errors.
> >>>> While at it: also bail-out on error returned when trying to get the
> >>>> "swctrl" GPIO.
> >>>>
> >>>> Reported-by: Wren Turkal<[email protected]>
> >>>> Reported-by: Zijun Hu<[email protected]>
> >>>> Closes:https://lore.kernel.org/linux-bluetooth/[email protected]/
> >>>> Fixes: 56d074d26c58 ("Bluetooth: hci_qca: don't use IS_ERR_OR_NULL() with gpiod_get_optional()")
> >>>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski<[email protected]>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski<[email protected]>
> >>>
> >>> Tested-by: "Wren Turkal" <[email protected]>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Like this?
> >>
> >> Yes, awesome, thanks.
> >>
> >> This is how reviewing works too in the kernel, look at what Krzysztof
> >> did under v1, he just wrote:
> >>
> >> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski<[email protected]>
> >>
> > v1 have obvious something wrong as i pointed and verified.
> > so i think it is not suitable to attach v1's review-by tag to v2 anyway.
>
> @Zijun, your concern is that current DTs may not define the gpio and
> this will cause the bluetooth not to work?
>
This is simply not true. If the GPIO is not specified,
gpiod_get_optional() will return NULL and GPIO APIs will work just
fine.
That being said: the contract for whether a GPIO is needed or not is
not in the driver C code or released DT sources. It's in the bindings
documents under Documentation/devicetree/bindings/. This is the source
of truth. So if the binding for a given model has always said
"required: enable-gpios" then we're absolutely in our rights to fix
the driver to conform to that even if previously omitted. If you think
otherwise - relax the bindings first.
Bart
> Would that not more appropriately be fixed by machine-specific fixups
> for the DT?
>
> >
> >> And mailing list tools will pick it up.
> >>
> >> Bartosz
> >
>
> --
> You're more amazing than you think!
On 4/24/24 6:36 AM, quic_zijuhu wrote:
> On 4/24/2024 9:31 PM, Wren Turkal wrote:
>> On 4/24/24 6:22 AM, quic_zijuhu wrote:
>>> On 4/24/2024 9:18 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 at 15:10, Wren Turkal <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4/24/24 5:29 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>>>>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski<[email protected]>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any return value from gpiod_get_optional() other than a pointer to a
>>>>>> GPIO descriptor or a NULL-pointer is an error and the driver should
>>>>>> abort probing. That being said: commit 56d074d26c58 ("Bluetooth:
>>>>>> hci_qca:
>>>>>> don't use IS_ERR_OR_NULL() with gpiod_get_optional()") no longer sets
>>>>>> power_ctrl_enabled on NULL-pointer returned by
>>>>>> devm_gpiod_get_optional(). Restore this behavior but bail-out on
>>>>>> errors.
>>>>>> While at it: also bail-out on error returned when trying to get the
>>>>>> "swctrl" GPIO.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Reported-by: Wren Turkal<[email protected]>
>>>>>> Reported-by: Zijun Hu<[email protected]>
>>>>>> Closes:https://lore.kernel.org/linux-bluetooth/[email protected]/
>>>>>> Fixes: 56d074d26c58 ("Bluetooth: hci_qca: don't use
>>>>>> IS_ERR_OR_NULL() with gpiod_get_optional()")
>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski<[email protected]>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski<[email protected]>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tested-by: "Wren Turkal" <[email protected]>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Like this?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, awesome, thanks.
>>>>
>>>> This is how reviewing works too in the kernel, look at what Krzysztof
>>>> did under v1, he just wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski<[email protected]>
>>>>
>>> v1 have obvious something wrong as i pointed and verified.
>>> so i think it is not suitable to attach v1's review-by tag to v2 anyway.
>>
>> @Zijun, your concern is that current DTs may not define the gpio and
>> this will cause the bluetooth not to work?
>>
>> Would that not more appropriately be fixed by machine-specific fixups
>> for the DT?
>>
> for lunched production, it is difficult or not possible to change such
> config.
I am not talking about the DT in the device. I am talking about the
mechanism the kernel has for applying fixups to DTs.
If a dev builds a new kernel for a dev and finds it not to work, the
kernel would then have a fixup added, like described here:
https://docs.kernel.org/devicetree/usage-model.html#platform-identification
>
>>>
>>>> And mailing list tools will pick it up.
>>>>
>>>> Bartosz
>>>
>>
>
--
You're more amazing than you think!