On 09/05/2025 03:43, Ping-Ke Shih wrote: > Bitterblue Smith <rtl8821cerfe2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 08/05/2025 06:29, Ping-Ke Shih wrote: >>> : Bitterblue Smith <rtl8821cerfe2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> RTL8811AU stops responding during the firmware download on some systems: >>>> >>>> [ 809.256440] rtw_8821au 5-2.1:1.0: Firmware version 42.4.0, H2C version 0 >>>> [ 812.759142] rtw_8821au 5-2.1:1.0 wlp48s0f4u2u1: renamed from wlan0 >>>> [ 837.315388] rtw_8821au 1-4:1.0: write register 0x1ef4 failed with -110 >>>> [ 867.524259] rtw_8821au 1-4:1.0: write register 0x1ef8 failed with -110 >>>> [ 868.930976] rtw_8821au 5-2.1:1.0 wlp48s0f4u2u1: entered promiscuous mode >>>> [ 897.730952] rtw_8821au 1-4:1.0: write register 0x1efc failed with -110 >>>> >>>> Maybe it takes too long when writing the firmware 4 bytes at a time. >>>> >>>> Write 196 bytes at a time for RTL8821AU, RTL8811AU, and RTL8812AU, >>>> and 254 bytes at a time for RTL8723DU. These are the sizes used in >>>> their official drivers. Tested with all these chips. >>>> >>>> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> Link: https://github.com/lwfinger/rtw88/issues/344 >>>> Signed-off-by: Bitterblue Smith <rtl8821cerfe2@xxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> Acked-by: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> [..] >>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/usb.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/usb.c >>>> index b16db579fdce..ad15ce12ab7f 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/usb.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/usb.c >>>> @@ -165,6 +165,60 @@ static void rtw_usb_write32(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev, u32 addr, u32 val) >>>> rtw_usb_write(rtwdev, addr, val, 4); >>>> } >>>> >>>> +static void rtw_usb_write_firmware_page(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev, u32 page, >>>> + const u8 *data, u32 size) >>>> +{ >>>> + struct rtw_usb *rtwusb = rtw_get_usb_priv(rtwdev); >>>> + struct usb_device *udev = rtwusb->udev; >>>> + u32 addr = FW_8192C_START_ADDRESS; >>> >>> FW_8192C_START_ADDRESS is existing already. But something like >>> RTW_USB_FW_START_ADDRESS would be better. >>> >> >> I agree, because rtw88 doesn't handle RTL8192C. There is >> FW_START_ADDR_LEGACY in fw.h. I must not have noticed it before. >> Should I send v2 for this? > > Yes, please. I don't change patch content during committing to prevent mess up > something. Since you only change the naming, please carry my Ack-by to next > version. > >> >>>> + u8 *data_dup, *buf; >>>> + u32 n, block_size; >>>> + int ret; >>>> + >>>> + switch (rtwdev->chip->id) { >>>> + case RTW_CHIP_TYPE_8723D: >>>> + block_size = 254; >>>> + break; >>>> + default: >>>> + block_size = 196; >>>> + break; >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + data_dup = kmemdup(data, size, GFP_KERNEL); >>> >>> This is because type of argument `data` of usb_control_msg() is not const, right? >>> Do you know if usb_control_msg() will actually modify the data? >>> >> >> No, it's because usb_control_msg() rejects memory allocated by >> vmalloc(). I don't remember what error it printed. Maybe because the >> memory is not suitable for DMA. > > Do you mean firmware is placed in memory allocated by vmalloc()? > If so, it makes sense to the reason you said. > Yes.
