Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210804153434.3429348-1-linus.walleij@linaro.org> <67ba8440-8f39-daa0-ef39-e506007fd46a@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <67ba8440-8f39-daa0-ef39-e506007fd46a@gmail.com>
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Date:   Thu, 5 Aug 2021 11:14:40 +0200
Message-ID: <CACRpkda+4CTeBpdFru82ekkF=PcN-5yGQtPBWuwXhE3biewoLA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] brcmfmac: firmware: Fix firmware loading
To:     Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>
Cc:     Arend van Spriel <aspriel@gmail.com>,
        Franky Lin <franky.lin@broadcom.com>,
        Hante Meuleman <hante.meuleman@broadcom.com>,
        Chi-hsien Lin <chi-hsien.lin@infineon.com>,
        Wright Feng <wright.feng@infineon.com>,
        Chung-hsien Hsu <chung-hsien.hsu@infineon.com>,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>,
        linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
        Stefan Hansson <newbyte@disroot.org>,
        Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 3:22 AM Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com> wrote:
> 04.08.2021 18:34, Linus Walleij =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82:
> > +static void brcmf_fw_request_done_first(const struct firmware *fw, voi=
d *ctx)
> >  {
> >       struct brcmf_fw *fwctx =3D ctx;
> > +     struct brcmf_fw_item *first =3D &fwctx->req->items[0];
> >       int ret;
> >
> > +     /* Something failed with the first firmware request, such as not
> > +      * getting the per-board firmware. Retry this, now using the less
> > +      * specific path for the first firmware item, i.e. without the bo=
ard
> > +      * suffix.
> > +      */
> > +     if (!fw && !fwctx->tested_board_variant) {
> > +             fwctx->tested_board_variant =3D true;
> > +             ret =3D request_firmware_nowait(THIS_MODULE, true, first-=
>path,
> > +                                           fwctx->dev, GFP_KERNEL, fwc=
tx,
> > +                                           brcmf_fw_request_done_first=
);
> > +             return;
>
> The original code was proceeding on error. Is this a typo here?

No, we are testing specifically for fw being NULL and in that case we issue
a new request_firmware_nowait() call with ourselves as "done" callback,
so we really need to return here.

The worker will call the same function again after this but now
tested_board_variant is true.

Yours,
Linus Walleij