Sending this again because Apple mail decided to default to HTML mails since the last update apparently *sigh*
Hi,
On Dec 27, 2023, at 11:30, Johan Hovold johan@kernel.org wrote:
On Mon, Dec 25, 2023 at 09:26:05PM +0100, Paul Menzel wrote:
Thank you very much for the patch. I am adding Johan to Cc field.
Thanks for the report. Guess I could use a break from the proverbial eggnog.
Am 25.12.23 um 21:01 schrieb Felix Zhang:
Starting v6.5, Bluetooth does not work at all on my T2 MacBookAir9,1 with the BCM4377 chip. When I boot up the computer, go into
Somehow a blank line snug in above.
bluetoothctl, and then try to run commands like scan on, show, list, it returns "No default controller available." I have tried reloading the
It’d be great if you reflowed for 75 characters per line (also below).
kernel module, in which the log outputs "{Added,Removed} hci0 (unconfigured)." With this patch, I am able to use Bluetooth as normal without any errors regarding hci0 being unconfigured. However, an issue is still present where sometimes hci_bcm4377 will have to be reloaded in order to get bluetooth to work. I believe this was still present before the previously mentioned commit. Due to the bit HCI_QUIRK_USE_BDADDR_PROPERTY being always set in drivers/bluetooth/hci_bcm4377.c (line 2371), the chip would be left unconfigured on kernels compiled after commit 6945795bc81a ("Bluetooth: fix use-bdaddr-property quirk") due to a change in its logic. On the M1 Macs, the device would be configured in the devicetree. However, that is not the case on T2 Macs. Because the bluetooth adapter is left unconfigured, it is not usable in the operating system. In order to circumvent this issue, a flag is added to prevent the bit from being set on the BCM4377, while setting it on the other devices.
The commit you tracked this down to restored the original semantics for HCI_QUIRK_USE_BDADDR_PROPERTY, which means that it should only be set for devices with an invalid address.
The Broadcom BCM4377 driver has so far been setting this flag unconditionally which now potentially results in also valid addresses being marked as invalid.
I've just sent a patch that makes sure to only mark invalid addresses as invalid:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231227101003.10534-1-johan+linaro@kernel.org/
Note however that the flag still needs to be set in case your device lacks storage for a unique device address so you cannot simply drop it for some device classes as you do below (unless you are certain that these devices will always have a valid address).
We do know that though.
BCM4377 is present on Apple’s x86 Macs and always has internal storage for the address. If the board comes up without an address there’s nothing much we can do because the address isn’t provided by ACPI or anything else and setting the invalid address quirk for that situation seems appropriate.
BCM4378/4387 is present on Apple’s ARM Macs and never has internal storage. The address is always provided by our bootloader in the device tree. These should always unconditionally set HCI_QUIRK_USE_BDADDR_PROPERTY just like this patch does.
Best,
Sven
On Thu, Dec 28, 2023 at 10:46:57AM +0100, Sven Peter wrote:
On Dec 27, 2023, at 11:30, Johan Hovold johan@kernel.org wrote:
The commit you tracked this down to restored the original semantics for HCI_QUIRK_USE_BDADDR_PROPERTY, which means that it should only be set for devices with an invalid address.
The Broadcom BCM4377 driver has so far been setting this flag unconditionally which now potentially results in also valid addresses being marked as invalid.
I've just sent a patch that makes sure to only mark invalid addresses as invalid:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231227101003.10534-1-johan+linaro@kernel.org/
Note however that the flag still needs to be set in case your device lacks storage for a unique device address so you cannot simply drop it for some device classes as you do below (unless you are certain that these devices will always have a valid address).
We do know that though.
BCM4377 is present on Apple’s x86 Macs and always has internal storage for the address. If the board comes up without an address there’s nothing much we can do because the address isn’t provided by ACPI or anything else and setting the invalid address quirk for that situation seems appropriate.
BCM4378/4387 is present on Apple’s ARM Macs and never has internal storage. The address is always provided by our bootloader in the device tree. These should always unconditionally set HCI_QUIRK_USE_BDADDR_PROPERTY just like this patch does.
Ok, good, then this patch and the one I posted are mostly equivalent assuming that the BCM4378/4387 return an invalid address during setup.
This patch may be preferred as it does not need to rely on such assumptions, though.
Johan
On 28-Dec-2023, at 5:41 PM, Johan Hovold johan@kernel.org wrote:
On Thu, Dec 28, 2023 at 10:46:57AM +0100, Sven Peter wrote:
On Dec 27, 2023, at 11:30, Johan Hovold johan@kernel.org wrote:
The commit you tracked this down to restored the original semantics for
HCI_QUIRK_USE_BDADDR_PROPERTY, which means that it should only be set for devices with an invalid address.
The Broadcom BCM4377 driver has so far been setting this flag unconditionally which now potentially results in also valid addresses being marked as invalid.
I've just sent a patch that makes sure to only mark invalid addresses as invalid:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231227101003.10534-1-johan+linaro@kernel.org/
Note however that the flag still needs to be set in case your device lacks storage for a unique device address so you cannot simply drop it for some device classes as you do below (unless you are certain that these devices will always have a valid address).
We do know that though.
BCM4377 is present on Apple’s x86 Macs and always has internal storage for the address. If the board comes up without an address there’s nothing much we can do because the address isn’t provided by ACPI or anything else and setting the invalid address quirk for that situation seems appropriate.
BCM4378/4387 is present on Apple’s ARM Macs and never has internal storage. The address is always provided by our bootloader in the device tree. These should always unconditionally set HCI_QUIRK_USE_BDADDR_PROPERTY just like this patch does.
Ok, good, then this patch and the one I posted are mostly equivalent assuming that the BCM4378/4387 return an invalid address during setup.
This patch may be preferred as it does not need to rely on such assumptions, though.
Johan
So what's the final take on this? Which one is gonna be merged upstream?
On 4. Jan 2024, at 08:47, Aditya Garg gargaditya08@live.com wrote:
On 28-Dec-2023, at 5:41 PM, Johan Hovold johan@kernel.org wrote:
On Thu, Dec 28, 2023 at 10:46:57AM +0100, Sven Peter wrote:
On Dec 27, 2023, at 11:30, Johan Hovold johan@kernel.org wrote:
The commit you tracked this down to restored the original semantics for
HCI_QUIRK_USE_BDADDR_PROPERTY, which means that it should only be set for devices with an invalid address.
The Broadcom BCM4377 driver has so far been setting this flag unconditionally which now potentially results in also valid addresses being marked as invalid.
I've just sent a patch that makes sure to only mark invalid addresses as invalid:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231227101003.10534-1-johan+linaro@kernel.org/
Note however that the flag still needs to be set in case your device lacks storage for a unique device address so you cannot simply drop it for some device classes as you do below (unless you are certain that these devices will always have a valid address).
We do know that though.
BCM4377 is present on Apple’s x86 Macs and always has internal storage for the address. If the board comes up without an address there’s nothing much we can do because the address isn’t provided by ACPI or anything else and setting the invalid address quirk for that situation seems appropriate.
BCM4378/4387 is present on Apple’s ARM Macs and never has internal storage. The address is always provided by our bootloader in the device tree. These should always unconditionally set HCI_QUIRK_USE_BDADDR_PROPERTY just like this patch does.
Ok, good, then this patch and the one I posted are mostly equivalent assuming that the BCM4378/4387 return an invalid address during setup.
This patch may be preferred as it does not need to rely on such assumptions, though.
Johan
So what's the final take on this? Which one is gonna be merged upstream?
I would’ve preferred this one (possibly with a better commit message) since it’s more explicit and doesn’t rely on additional assumptions but it looks like Johan’s version was already merged.
Sven
On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 08:50:19AM +0100, Sven Peter wrote:
On 4. Jan 2024, at 08:47, Aditya Garg gargaditya08@live.com wrote:
On 28-Dec-2023, at 5:41 PM, Johan Hovold johan@kernel.org wrote:
Ok, good, then this patch and the one I posted are mostly equivalent assuming that the BCM4378/4387 return an invalid address during setup.
This patch may be preferred as it does not need to rely on such assumptions, though.
So what's the final take on this? Which one is gonna be merged upstream?
I would’ve preferred this one (possibly with a better commit message) since it’s more explicit and doesn’t rely on additional assumptions but it looks like Johan’s version was already merged.
Which addresses do BCM4378/4387 return before they are configured? Should be easy enough to verify that the current check for invalid addresses catches those or otherwise add them to the list.
Johan
On 4. Jan 2024, at 09:21, Johan Hovold johan@kernel.org wrote:
On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 08:50:19AM +0100, Sven Peter wrote:
On 4. Jan 2024, at 08:47, Aditya Garg gargaditya08@live.com wrote:
On 28-Dec-2023, at 5:41 PM, Johan Hovold johan@kernel.org wrote:
Ok, good, then this patch and the one I posted are mostly equivalent assuming that the BCM4378/4387 return an invalid address during setup.
This patch may be preferred as it does not need to rely on such assumptions, though.
So what's the final take on this? Which one is gonna be merged upstream?
I would’ve preferred this one (possibly with a better commit message) since it’s more explicit and doesn’t rely on additional assumptions but it looks like Johan’s version was already merged.
Which addresses do BCM4378/4387 return before they are configured? Should be easy enough to verify that the current check for invalid addresses catches those or otherwise add them to the list.
Johan
I think the check used to work for BRCM4378 when I originally wrote the driver but I don’t have any BRCM4387 hardware so can’t test that myself.
Sven
linux-stable-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
Aditya Garg -
Johan Hovold -
Sven Peter