Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-bluetooth+bounces-4020-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1713919602-5812-1-git-send-email-quic_zijuhu@quicinc.com>
 <1713919602-5812-2-git-send-email-quic_zijuhu@quicinc.com>
 <349b27a5-d2d3-46f1-b002-44f81e0cedef@linaro.org> <e8cd122d-e342-45c2-b078-a4ca2d8dcfff@quicinc.com>
 <dfe18768-f6da-4c60-880d-deeae3c3b04d@linaro.org> <8ae32009-5f5e-49a1-88a1-e330f0614f60@quicinc.com>
 <5e363318-c6e4-4874-8026-7940b434d583@linaro.org> <2020a858-c3d9-48a7-ad59-3691c6b98fb2@penguintechs.org>
 <CABBYNZJLCPaLTaFEfeTEn+2FpxLS8Z-W2kT1ry4jKB_W=XYNjA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACMJSeuWQE4t2KDCRP7n-DeHN9Ndn1bE_KCRc-X2kmM9L2i7_Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <38736db8-eec4-4ebd-b4c4-4b404cea6e42@quicinc.com> <CACMJSev8=gBCw9o-ur87fMMj9K=ZWY-ECzxZjyvERYQ8P=VS7A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABBYNZ+PvZb6azHoXAbO2czqK2zQnZ1ddcKRb_YX-zGSVfy+KQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACMJSeue3kM-G1UvO0REEAJbhU9vOqbeEzy0Qny5udKLB97e8g@mail.gmail.com> <2805ad96-6383-45b3-9b68-66578461bb5f@quicinc.com>
In-Reply-To: <2805ad96-6383-45b3-9b68-66578461bb5f@quicinc.com>
From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 16:41:05 +0200
Message-ID: <CACMJSeuyumcmkO8pYiWk6Gccd7njpke23NdboYrxNZxHx6XjAQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] Bluetooth: qca: Fix BT enable failure for QCA6390
To: Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@gmail.com>
Cc: Wren Turkal <wt@penguintechs.org>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>, luiz.von.dentz@intel.com, 
	marcel@holtmann.org, linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org, 
	regressions@lists.linux.dev, kernel@quicinc.com, 
	quic_zijuhu <quic_zijuhu@quicinc.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 at 16:25, quic_zijuhu <quic_zijuhu@quicinc.com> wrote:
>
> On 4/24/2024 10:19 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 at 16:08, Luiz Augusto von Dentz
> > <luiz.dentz@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Bartosz,
> >>
> >> On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 10:00=E2=80=AFAM Bartosz Golaszewski
> >> <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 at 15:53, quic_zijuhu <quic_zijuhu@quicinc.com> w=
rote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Please slow down here. Zijun's patch works and Bartosz's patch do=
es not.
> >>>>>>> I don't think Zijun means any ill intent. I am replying to Bartos=
z's
> >>>>>>> patch right now.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Ok, that is great feedback, so I might be picking up the Zijun v7 =
set
> >>>>>> if we don't find any major problems with it.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Luiz,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please consider my alternative[1] also tested by Wren. Zijun's usag=
e
> >>>>> of GPIO API is wrong.
> >>>>>
> >>>> why is it wrong ?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I have already told you that at least three times. But whatever, let
> >>> me repeat again: gpiod_get_optional() returns NULL if the given GPIO
> >>> is not assigned to the device in question OR a pointer to a valid GPI=
O
> >>> descriptor. Anything else returned by it is an error and the driver
> >>> must abort probe().
> >>
> >> Ok, but there are other fixes on top of it:
> >>
> >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bluetooth/patch/1713932807-19619-=
3-git-send-email-quic_zijuhu@quicinc.com/
> >>
> >> I guess that could go in but it would really help if you guys could
> >> work together so we don't have more competing solutions.
> >>
> >
> > These threads with their 7 patch versions from Zijun within 2 days or
> > so have become very chaotic. Let me summarize: there are two
> > regressions: one caused by my commit 6845667146a2 ("Bluetooth:
> > hci_qca: Fix NULL vs IS_ERR_OR_NULL check in qca_serdev_probe") and a
> > second caused by Krzysztof's commit 272970be3dab ("Bluetooth: hci_qca:
> > Fix driver shutdown on closed serdev"). The patch I linked here is how
> > I propose to fix my regression only. These fixes don't seem to
> > conflict with one another.
> >
> it is not conflict issue, from my perspective, you fix are wrong.
> do you see my patch change log?
>
> > We (Krzysztof and I) have provided feedback to Zijun but he refused to
> > address it and instead kept on resending his patches every couple
> > hours. Zijun's patch 1/2 proposed to revert my commit 6845667146a2. I
> > disagreed and proposed a way forward by fixing the regression. This
> > fix was incorrect as pointed out by Wren, so I submitted v2 which
> > works.
> >
> v2 is not right from my point as i commented with your solution.
>
> you don't answer my questions commented within your solution.
>
> what is your question i don't answer?
>
> > Bartosz
>

Luiz,

This is an example of how Zijun will borrow any attempt at meaningful
communication under a heap of incomprehensible emails. Krzysztof has
already given up and I think I will stop too now. As the GPIO
maintainer I suggest you take my fix for this regression. I can't make
you though and I've already wasted way too much time on it. Your call.

Bartosz