linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] brcmfmac: Support 89459 pcie

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]

Date:   Mon, 2 Jan 2023 23:01:10 +0900
From:   Hector Martin <marcan@...can.st>
To:     Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com>,
        Aditya Garg <gargaditya08@...e.com>
Cc:     Ian Lin <ian.lin@...ineon.com>,
        "alep@...ress.com" <alep@...ress.com>,
        "brcm80211-dev-list@...adcom.com" <brcm80211-dev-list@...adcom.com>,
        "brcm80211-dev-list@...ress.com" <brcm80211-dev-list@...ress.com>,
        "franky.lin@...adcom.com" <franky.lin@...adcom.com>,
        "hante.meuleman@...adcom.com" <hante.meuleman@...adcom.com>,
        "kvalo@...nel.org" <kvalo@...nel.org>,
        "Double.Lo@...ineon.com" <Double.Lo@...ineon.com>,
        "linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Asahi Linux <asahi@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] brcmfmac: Support 89459 pcie

On 02/01/2023 22.58, Arend van Spriel wrote:
> On 1/2/2023 10:45 AM, Aditya Garg wrote:
>> Hi Hector
>>
>>>
>>> Is the CYW89459 just a rebrand of the BCM4355, or just a subset? If it
>>> is a rebrand, it's okay if we call our Apple firmware
>>> brcmfmac89459-pcie* (note that we use per-board firmware names, so it
>>> wouldn't conflict with a generic one). However, if CYW89459 only refers
>>> to specific variants, I think the firmware should be named after the
>>> overall bcm4355 family.
>>>
>>> I'm guessing you intend to ship firmware for this. Would that firmware
>>> work for all 4355 variants, or only the CYW one? If only the CYW one, is
>>> it possible to differentiate between them based on PCI revision ID? Note
>>> that our 4355 has revision ID 12, and Apple specifically calls it 4355C1
>>> (different chip revisions have different firmware builds, which is why I
>>> named our firmware brcmfmac4355c1-pcie). If the CYW variant uses other
>>> revision IDs that do not overlap, maybe we should have different
>>> firmware entries for them with different masks.
>>
>>
>> Can we make a separate table for the OTP Apple chips, something like here :-
>>
>> https://github.com/AdityaGarg8/linux/commit/fc41aac9283d2ba653a8b3191e8c0138c13d8ee1
> 
> I do not understand from this email thread why you would need separate 
> tables. Can you explain?
> 

I think he's proposing we special-case Apple chips into their own
firmware table just to avoid colliding with non-Apple firmware usage,
which is honestly kind of tempting as the safe option if nobody from the
Broadcom/Cypress side is willing to clarify what, exactly, is the
relationship between these chips and what their respective revision
numbers are so we can *correctly* represent them and avoid further
confusion and problems down the line.

You might be able to help with that ;)

- Hector