Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-bluetooth+bounces-4023-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Message-ID: <34091f3a-9711-445d-a369-540bcfc49b29@quicinc.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 22:46:33 +0800
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] Bluetooth: qca: Fix BT enable failure for QCA6390
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>,
        "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>
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>
 <CACMJSeuyumcmkO8pYiWk6Gccd7njpke23NdboYrxNZxHx6XjAQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: quic_zijuhu <quic_zijuhu@quicinc.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACMJSeuyumcmkO8pYiWk6Gccd7njpke23NdboYrxNZxHx6XjAQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On 4/24/2024 10:41 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> 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 AM Bartosz Golaszewski
>>>> <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 at 15:53, quic_zijuhu <quic_zijuhu@quicinc.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Please slow down here. Zijun's patch works and Bartosz's patch does not.
>>>>>>>>> I don't think Zijun means any ill intent. I am replying to Bartosz'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 usage
>>>>>>> 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 GPIO
>>>>> 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.
> 
how about GPIO maintainer? it is your change about GPIOs causes serious
regression issue.

i maybe send many mails. but dos it have any relevant my change's rightness.

do you find anything my change have wrong usage about GPIO about the
case i care about?

> Bartosz