linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] Bluetooth: hci_qca: Retry btsoc initialize when it fails

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <16cfaba272ad50fa5ae0f778731844f6@codeaurora.org>
Date:   Tue, 07 Jan 2020 13:34:04 +0800
From:   Rocky Liao <rjliao@...eaurora.org>
To:     Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>
Cc:     marcel@...tmann.org, johan.hedberg@...il.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-bluetooth-owner@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] Bluetooth: hci_qca: Retry btsoc initialize when it
 fails

在 2020-01-04 00:27，Matthias Kaehlcke 写道：
> On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 02:31:46PM +0800, rjliao@...eaurora.org wrote:
>> 在 2020-01-03 02:41，Matthias Kaehlcke 写道：
>> 
>> > Hi Rocky,
>> >
>> > On Fri, Dec 27, 2019 at 03:21:28PM +0800, Rocky Liao wrote:
>> >
>> > > This patch adds the retry of btsoc initialization when it fails.
>> > > There are
>> > > reports that the btsoc initialization may fail on some platforms but
>> > > the
>> > > repro ratio is very low. The failure may be caused by UART, platform
>> > > HW or
>> > > the btsoc itself but it's very difficlut to root cause, given the
>> > > repro
>> > > ratio is very low. Add a retry for the btsoc initialization will
>> > > resolve
>> > > most of the failures and make Bluetooth finally works.
>> >
>> > Is this problem specific to a certain chipset?
>> >
>> > What are the symptoms?
>> 
>> It's reported on Rome so far but I think the patch is potentially 
>> helpful
>> for
>> wcn399x as well.
>> 
>> The symptoms is the firmware downloading failed due to the UART write 
>> timed
>> out.
> 
> Working around this with retries seems ok for now if the repro rate is
> really low, but it shouldn't necessarily be interpreted as "the problem 
> is
> fixed". Please mention the symptoms in the commit message for 
> documentation,
> then the retries can potentially be removed in the futures when the 
> root
> cause is fixed.
> 
>> > > enum qca_btsoc_type soc_type = qca_soc_type(hu);
>> > > const char *firmware_name = qca_get_firmware_name(hu);
>> > > int ret;
>> > > @@ -1275,6 +1280,7 @@ static int qca_setup(struct hci_uart *hu)
>> > > */
>> > > set_bit(HCI_QUIRK_SIMULTANEOUS_DISCOVERY, &hdev->quirks);
>> > >
>> > > +retry:
>> > > if (qca_is_wcn399x(soc_type)) {
>> > > bt_dev_info(hdev, "setting up wcn3990");
>> > >
>> > > @@ -1293,6 +1299,12 @@ static int qca_setup(struct hci_uart *hu)
>> > > return ret;
>> > > } else {
>> > > bt_dev_info(hdev, "ROME setup");
>> > > +        if (hu->serdev) {
>> > > +            qcadev = serdev_device_get_drvdata(hu->serdev);
>> > > +            gpiod_set_value_cansleep(qcadev->bt_en, 1);
>> > > +            /* Controller needs time to bootup. */
>> > > +            msleep(150);
>> >
>> > Shouldn't this be in qca_power_on(), analogous to the power off code
>> > from
>> > "[1/4]Bluetooth: hci_qca: Add QCA Rome power off support to the
>> > qca_power_off()"?
>> >
>> > qca_power_on() should then also be called for ROME. If you opt for this
>> > it
>> > should be done in a separate patch, or possibly merged into the one
>> > mentioned above.
>> >
>> 
>> There is no qca_power_on() func and wcn399x is calling 
>> qca_wcn3990_init() to
>> do power on, I prefer to not do this change this time.
> 
> I would say it's precisely the right time to add this function. Patch 1 
> of this
> series adds handling of the BT_EN GPIO to qca_power_off(), now this 
> patch
> duplicates the code of the BT_EN handling in qca_open().
> 
>> If it's needed
> 
> 'needed' is a relative term. It certainly isn't needed from a purely 
> functional
> POV. However it is desirable for encapsulation and to avoid code 
> duplication.
> 
>> it should be a new patch to add qca_power_on() which supports both 
>> Rome and wcn399x.
> 
> Agreed
> 

Have sent out a new patch to add the qca_power_on() API, will refresh 
this patch after that new patch merged.

> m.