Return-path: Received: from wolverine02.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.251]:26100 "EHLO wolverine02.qualcomm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754660AbcEZRcg convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 May 2016 13:32:36 -0400 From: "Valo, Kalle" To: Sven Eckelmann CC: "ath10k@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] ath10k: Add support for QCA9887 Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 17:32:30 +0000 Message-ID: <87mvnc67yq.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> (sfid-20160526_193240_336501_4CF501D0) References: <1568876.Six5hABE57@bentobox> In-Reply-To: <1568876.Six5hABE57@bentobox> (Sven Eckelmann's message of "Fri, 20 May 2016 16:40:46 +0200") Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Sven Eckelmann writes: > the QCA9887 chip is similar to the QCA988x chips. But it requires a special > firmware and uses a different calibration data source. Unfortunately, no > working firmware currently exists. But it is possible to create a semi working > one by binary patching the current version. So what works and what doesn't? > # download new fw + set ATH10K_FW_FEATURE_HAS_WMI_MGMT_TX+ATH10K_FW_FEATURE_NO_P2P > curl -o firmware-5.bin https://raw.githubusercontent.com/kvalo/ath10k-firmware/master/QCA9887/firmware-5.bin_10.2.3.31.7-1 > echo -en '\x0c'|dd conv=notrunc bs=1 seek=231112 of=firmware-5.bin > mkdir -p /lib/firmware/ath10k/QCA9887/hw1.0/ > mv firmware-5.bin /lib/firmware/ath10k/QCA9887/hw1.0/firmware-5.bin > > I am also guessing that ATH10K_FW_FEATURE_SUPPORTS_SKIP_CLOCK_INIT should > also be set but this would require a ie_len of 2. I can upload a new version. So I need to add these flags: ATH10K_FW_FEATURE_HAS_WMI_MGMT_TX ATH10K_FW_FEATURE_NO_P2P ATH10K_FW_FEATURE_SUPPORTS_SKIP_CLOCK_INIT Anything else? > The QCA9887 support should be considered really experimental because we don't > have any information how the interface to firmware actually looks like. The > workarounds mentioned above were just implemented because we saw the firmware > crashing and then guessed the most plausible reason for it. Should we add a warning message to ath10k that the QCA9887 support is experimental? That way users don't need to wonder why there are so many problems. There were some conflicts in patch 1. I fixed those now and pushed the patches to the pending branch for further testing: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/kvalo/ath.git/log/?h=master-pending Unfortunately I don't have QCA9887 myself so I can't test these myself. I hope I didn't break anything. -- Kalle Valo