To avoid the firmware loading race between Bluetooth and WiFi on Intel
8260, load firmware exclusively when BT_INTEL is enabled.
Signed-off-by: Kai-Heng Feng <[email protected]>
---
.../net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 38 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c
index cc8c53dc0ab6..bbd7e199e968 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c
@@ -72,6 +72,10 @@
#include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
#include <linux/module.h>
+#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BT_INTEL)
+#include <linux/intel-wifi-bt.h>
+#endif
+
#include "iwl-drv.h"
#include "iwl-trans.h"
#include "iwl-csr.h"
@@ -1335,6 +1339,10 @@ static int iwl_trans_pcie_start_fw(struct iwl_trans *trans,
bool hw_rfkill;
int ret;
+#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BT_INTEL)
+ void (*firmware_lock_func)(void);
+ void (*firmware_unlock_func)(void);
+#endif
/* This may fail if AMT took ownership of the device */
if (iwl_pcie_prepare_card_hw(trans)) {
IWL_WARN(trans, "Exit HW not ready\n");
@@ -1401,8 +1409,37 @@ static int iwl_trans_pcie_start_fw(struct iwl_trans *trans,
iwl_write32(trans, CSR_UCODE_DRV_GP1_CLR, CSR_UCODE_SW_BIT_RFKILL);
/* Load the given image to the HW */
- if (trans->cfg->device_family >= IWL_DEVICE_FAMILY_8000)
+ if (trans->cfg->device_family >= IWL_DEVICE_FAMILY_8000) {
+#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BT_INTEL)
+ firmware_lock_func = symbol_request(btintel_firmware_lock);
+ firmware_unlock_func = symbol_request(btintel_firmware_unlock);
+ if (!firmware_lock_func || !firmware_unlock_func) {
+ if (firmware_lock_func) {
+ symbol_put(btintel_firmware_lock);
+ firmware_lock_func = NULL;
+ }
+
+ if (firmware_unlock_func) {
+ symbol_put(btintel_firmware_unlock);
+ firmware_unlock_func = NULL;
+ }
+ }
+
+ if (firmware_lock_func)
+ firmware_lock_func();
+#endif
ret = iwl_pcie_load_given_ucode_8000(trans, fw);
+
+#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BT_INTEL)
+ if (firmware_unlock_func) {
+ firmware_unlock_func();
+ symbol_put(btintel_firmware_lock);
+ firmware_lock_func = NULL;
+ symbol_put(btintel_firmware_unlock);
+ firmware_unlock_func = NULL;
+ }
+#endif
+ }
else
ret = iwl_pcie_load_given_ucode(trans, fw);
--
2.17.1
Kai-Heng Feng <[email protected]> writes:
> To avoid the firmware loading race between Bluetooth and WiFi on Intel
> 8260, load firmware exclusively when BT_INTEL is enabled.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kai-Heng Feng <[email protected]>
Still the commit log tells nothing about the actual problem which makes
review impossible.
--
Kalle Valo
> On Oct 3, 2018, at 5:10 PM, Kalle Valo <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Kai-Heng Feng <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> To avoid the firmware loading race between Bluetooth and WiFi on Intel
>> 8260, load firmware exclusively when BT_INTEL is enabled.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kai-Heng Feng <[email protected]>
>
> Still the commit log tells nothing about the actual problem which makes
> review impossible.
Sorry for that. The first two patches [1] only sends to linux-bluetooth and LMKL.
I don’t know what really happened at hardware/firmware level, but making btusb and iwlwifi load firmware sequentially can workaround the issue.
Matt Chen may be able to explain this issue with more detail.
[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/3/322
>
> --
> Kalle Valo
Kai Heng Feng <[email protected]> writes:
>> On Oct 3, 2018, at 5:10 PM, Kalle Valo <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Kai-Heng Feng <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>>> To avoid the firmware loading race between Bluetooth and WiFi on Intel
>>> 8260, load firmware exclusively when BT_INTEL is enabled.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Kai-Heng Feng <[email protected]>
>>
>> Still the commit log tells nothing about the actual problem which makes
>> review impossible.
>
> Sorry for that. The first two patches [1] only sends to linux-bluetooth and LMKL.
For a patchset like this you should CC linux-wireless for all patches,
otherwise people just get confused. And even more so as patch 3 seems to
depend on the other patches.
> I don’t know what really happened at hardware/firmware level, but
> making btusb and iwlwifi load firmware sequentially can workaround the
> issue.
We don't apply ugly workarounds without understanding the issue.
> Matt Chen may be able to explain this issue with more detail.
Then you need to work with Matt so that the issue is properly explained
in the commit log.
--
Kalle Valo
Kalle Valo <[email protected]> writes:
> Kai Heng Feng <[email protected]> writes:
>
>>> On Oct 3, 2018, at 5:10 PM, Kalle Valo <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Kai-Heng Feng <[email protected]> writes:
>>>
>>>> To avoid the firmware loading race between Bluetooth and WiFi on Intel
>>>> 8260, load firmware exclusively when BT_INTEL is enabled.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Kai-Heng Feng <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> Still the commit log tells nothing about the actual problem which makes
>>> review impossible.
>>
>> Sorry for that. The first two patches [1] only sends to linux-bluetooth and LMKL.
>
> For a patchset like this you should CC linux-wireless for all patches,
> otherwise people just get confused. And even more so as patch 3 seems to
> depend on the other patches.
>
>> I don’t know what really happened at hardware/firmware level, but
>> making btusb and iwlwifi load firmware sequentially can workaround the
>> issue.
>
> We don't apply ugly workarounds without understanding the issue.
>
>> Matt Chen may be able to explain this issue with more detail.
>
> Then you need to work with Matt so that the issue is properly explained
> in the commit log.
linux-bluetooth was not CCed, adding that.
--
Kalle Valo
>
> > On Oct 3, 2018, at 5:10 PM, Kalle Valo <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Kai-Heng Feng <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> >> To avoid the firmware loading race between Bluetooth and WiFi on
> >> Intel 8260, load firmware exclusively when BT_INTEL is enabled.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Kai-Heng Feng <[email protected]>
> >
> > Still the commit log tells nothing about the actual problem which
> > makes review impossible.
>
> Sorry for that. The first two patches [1] only sends to linux-bluetooth and
> LMKL.
>
> I don’t know what really happened at hardware/firmware level, but making
> btusb and iwlwifi load firmware sequentially can workaround the issue.
>
> Matt Chen may be able to explain this issue with more detail.
>
> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/3/322
>
I just read the code of this patch and I don't quite understand.
You have a function that is declared as a non-inline function in two different header files?
btintel_firmware_lock is declared here:
--- /dev/null
+++ b/include/linux/intel-wifi-bt.h
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
+#ifndef __INTEL_WIFI_BT_H__
+#define __INTEL_WIFI_BT_H__
+
+void btintel_firmware_lock(void);
And ...
diff --git a/drivers/bluetooth/btintel.h b/drivers/bluetooth/btintel.h
index 41c642cc523f..1373ffc2b575 100644
--- a/drivers/bluetooth/btintel.h
+++ b/drivers/bluetooth/btintel.h
@@ -102,6 +102,8 @@ int btintel_read_boot_params(struct hci_dev *hdev,
struct intel_boot_params *params);
int btintel_download_firmware(struct hci_dev *dev, const struct firmware *fw,
u32 *boot_param);
+void btintel_firmware_lock(void);
This can't be right.
+ linux-bluetooth
"Grumbach, Emmanuel" <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>> > On Oct 3, 2018, at 5:10 PM, Kalle Valo <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > Kai-Heng Feng <[email protected]> writes:
>> >
>> >> To avoid the firmware loading race between Bluetooth and WiFi on
>> >> Intel 8260, load firmware exclusively when BT_INTEL is enabled.
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Kai-Heng Feng <[email protected]>
>> >
>> > Still the commit log tells nothing about the actual problem which
>> > makes review impossible.
>>
>> Sorry for that. The first two patches [1] only sends to linux-bluetooth and
>> LMKL.
>>
>> I don’t know what really happened at hardware/firmware level, but making
>> btusb and iwlwifi load firmware sequentially can workaround the issue.
>>
>> Matt Chen may be able to explain this issue with more detail.
>>
>> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/3/322
>>
>
> I just read the code of this patch and I don't quite understand.
> You have a function that is declared as a non-inline function in two different header files?
> btintel_firmware_lock is declared here:
>
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/include/linux/intel-wifi-bt.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> +#ifndef __INTEL_WIFI_BT_H__
> +#define __INTEL_WIFI_BT_H__
> +
> +void btintel_firmware_lock(void);
>
> And ...
>
> diff --git a/drivers/bluetooth/btintel.h b/drivers/bluetooth/btintel.h
> index 41c642cc523f..1373ffc2b575 100644
> --- a/drivers/bluetooth/btintel.h
> +++ b/drivers/bluetooth/btintel.h
> @@ -102,6 +102,8 @@ int btintel_read_boot_params(struct hci_dev *hdev,
> struct intel_boot_params *params);
> int btintel_download_firmware(struct hci_dev *dev, const struct firmware *fw,
> u32 *boot_param);
> +void btintel_firmware_lock(void);
>
>
> This can't be right.
--
Kalle Valo