[PATCH v2] wifi: ath10k: Add WLAN firmware image version info into smem

[Youghandhar Chintala (Temp)]

On 11/7/2022 11:05 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Youghandhar Chintala (2022-11-04 01:28:28)
>> In a SoC based solution, it would be useful to know the versions of the
>> various binary firmware blobs the system is running on. On a QCOM based
>> SoC, this info can be obtained from socinfo debugfs infrastructure. For
>> this to work, respective subsystem drivers have to export the firmware
>> version information to an SMEM based version information table.
>>
>> Having firmware version information at one place will help quickly
>> figure out the firmware versions of various subsystems on the device
>> instead of going through builds/logs in an event of a system crash.
>>
>> Fill WLAN firmware version information in SMEM version table to be
>> printed as part of socinfo debugfs infrastructure on a Qualcomm based
>> SoC.
>>
>> This change is applicable only for WCN399X targets.
>>
>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp at intel.com>
>>
>> Tested-on: WCN3990 hw1.0 SNOC WLAN.HL.3.2.2.c10-00754-QCAHLSWMTPL-1
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Youghandhar Chintala <quic_youghand at quicinc.com>
> The trailers go together, no blank lines between them.
>
>> ---
>> Changes from v1:
>>   - Changed print format specifier to %zu from %i
>>   - Changed ath10k_qmi_add_wlan_ver_smem() API argument
>>            to const char *fw_build_id from char *fw_build_id
>>   - Changed version_string_size with MACRO
>> ---
>>   drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/qmi.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 28 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/qmi.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/qmi.c
>> index 66cb7a1e628a..928d78f6d494 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/qmi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/qmi.c
>> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
>>   #include <linux/net.h>
>>   #include <linux/platform_device.h>
>>   #include <linux/qcom_scm.h>
>> +#include <linux/soc/qcom/smem.h>
>>   #include <linux/string.h>
>>   #include <net/sock.h>
>>
>> @@ -22,6 +23,8 @@
>>
>>   #define ATH10K_QMI_CLIENT_ID           0x4b4e454c
>>   #define ATH10K_QMI_TIMEOUT             30
>> +#define ATH10K_SMEM_IMAGE_VERSION_TABLE       469
>> +#define ATH10K_SMEM_IMAGE_TABLE_CNSS_INDEX     13
>>
>>   static int ath10k_qmi_map_msa_permission(struct ath10k_qmi *qmi,
>>                                           struct ath10k_msa_mem_info *mem_info)
>> @@ -536,6 +539,29 @@ int ath10k_qmi_wlan_disable(struct ath10k *ar)
>>          return ath10k_qmi_mode_send_sync_msg(ar, QMI_WLFW_OFF_V01);
>>   }
>>
>> +static void ath10k_qmi_add_wlan_ver_smem(struct ath10k *ar, const char *fw_build_id)
>> +{
>> +       u8 *smem_table_ptr;
>> +       size_t smem_block_size;
>> +       const u32 version_string_size = MAX_BUILD_ID_LEN;
> Why not make this size_t as well so the type is the same for the
> comparison with smem_block_size?
>
>> +       const u32 smem_img_idx_wlan = ATH10K_SMEM_IMAGE_TABLE_CNSS_INDEX * 128;
>> +
>> +       smem_table_ptr = qcom_smem_get(QCOM_SMEM_HOST_ANY,
>> +                                      ATH10K_SMEM_IMAGE_VERSION_TABLE,
>> +                                      &smem_block_size);
>> +       if (IS_ERR(smem_table_ptr)) {
>> +               ath10k_dbg(ar, ATH10K_DBG_QMI, "smem image version table not found");
> Is this missing a newline?
>
>> +               return;
>> +       }
>> +       if (smem_img_idx_wlan + version_string_size > smem_block_size) {
>> +               ath10k_dbg(ar, ATH10K_DBG_QMI, "smem block size too small: %zu",
> Same newline question.
>
>> +                          smem_block_size);
>> +               return;
>> +       }
>> +       memcpy(smem_table_ptr + smem_img_idx_wlan, fw_build_id,
> Is it a string? Does it need to be NUL terminated? Should this use some
> sort of strcpy()? Does the comparison above need to leave a space for
> the NUL terminator?
>
>> +              version_string_size);
>> +}
>> +
>>   static int ath10k_qmi_cap_send_sync_msg(struct ath10k_qmi *qmi)
>>   {
>>          struct wlfw_cap_resp_msg_v01 *resp;


Thank you Stephen.

I will address all your comments in next version of patch.

Regards,

Youghandhar