On 10/22/25 7:40 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 07:22:49PM +0530, Ayush Singh wrote:
On 10/22/25 5:33 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 12:57:57PM +0530, Ayush Singh wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/staging/greybus/fw-download.c b/drivers/staging/greybus/fw-download.c index 9a09bd3af79ba0dcf7efa683f4e86246bcd473a5..06f1be8f3121e29551ea8416d5ee2666339b2fe3 100644 --- a/drivers/staging/greybus/fw-download.c +++ b/drivers/staging/greybus/fw-download.c @@ -159,7 +159,7 @@ static int exceeds_release_timeout(struct fw_request *fw_req) /* This returns path of the firmware blob on the disk */ static struct fw_request *find_firmware(struct fw_download *fw_download,
const char *tag)
const char *tag, const char *format)@@ -178,10 +178,17 @@ static struct fw_request *find_firmware(struct fw_download *fw_download, } fw_req->firmware_id = ret;
- snprintf(fw_req->name, sizeof(fw_req->name),
FW_NAME_PREFIX "%08x_%08x_%08x_%08x_%s.tftf",intf->ddbl1_manufacturer_id, intf->ddbl1_product_id,intf->vendor_id, intf->product_id, tag);
- if (strnlen(format, GB_FIRMWARE_FORMAT_MAX_SIZE) == 0) {
Change this to:
if (format[0] == '\0') {
In the caller, the assumption that format is at least GB_FIRMWARE_FORMAT_MAX_SIZE makes sense but in this function it doesn't make sense.
Ok, will do in the next version.
snprintf(fw_req->name, sizeof(fw_req->name),FW_NAME_PREFIX "%08x_%08x_%08x_%08x_%s",intf->ddbl1_manufacturer_id, intf->ddbl1_product_id,intf->vendor_id, intf->product_id, tag);- } else {
snprintf(fw_req->name, sizeof(fw_req->name),FW_NAME_PREFIX "%08x_%08x_%08x_%08x_%s.%s",intf->ddbl1_manufacturer_id, intf->ddbl1_product_id,intf->vendor_id, intf->product_id, tag, format);- } dev_info(fw_download->parent, "Requested firmware package '%s'\n", fw_req->name);
@@ -225,7 +232,7 @@ static int fw_download_find_firmware(struct gb_operation *op) struct gb_fw_download_find_firmware_request *request; struct gb_fw_download_find_firmware_response *response; struct fw_request *fw_req;
- const char *tag;
- const char *tag, *format; if (op->request->payload_size != sizeof(*request)) { dev_err(fw_download->parent,
We have changed the sizeof(*request) but we haven't changed ->payload_size so how can this ever be true? Did you test this change?
The request originates in greybus node. The payload size here is calculate from the greybus message header. It is not a hard coded value. So as long as the node sets it correctly, it will work fine.
I guess, how was this working for other people then? It seems like a behavior change.
Well, it is technically a breaking change, if any device was already using fw download protocol. With that said, I have no idea who is using greybus right now. And since the changes are in staging drivers, it probably is fine.
I don't really know if the spec came first or linux implementation. But one of them is currently incorrect.
Just to clarify, greybus-for-zephyr is not the original or source of truth implementation of greybus. I just found the inconsistency between what the spec says, and what Linux kernel implements and thought that spec should probably have higher priority.
Best Regards,
Ayush Singh