[Raring][PATCH] UBUNTU: SAUCE: Bluetooth: use hci_send_cmd instead of usb_control_msg

[Tim Gardner]

More comments below...

On 09/04/2013 10:42 AM, Jesse Sung wrote:
> From: Wen-chien Jesse Sung <jesse.sung at canonical.com>
> 
> BugLink: https://launchpad.net/bugs/1065400
> 
> Calling usb_control_msg directly to send firmware file does not work
> with new platforms. Use hci_send_cmd instead.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Wen-chien Jesse Sung <jesse.sung at canonical.com>
> ---
>  drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
>  net/bluetooth/hci_core.c  |  1 +
>  2 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c b/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c
> index 5be9002..3a82e09 100644
> --- a/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c
> +++ b/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c
> @@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ static struct usb_driver btusb_driver;
>  #define BTUSB_BROKEN_ISOC	0x20
>  #define BTUSB_WRONG_SCO_MTU	0x40
>  #define BTUSB_ATH3012		0x80
> -#define BTUSB_BCM_PATCHRAM	0x100
> +#define BTUSB_BCM_PATCHRAM	0x800
>  
>  static struct usb_device_id btusb_table[] = {
>  	/* Generic Bluetooth USB device */
> @@ -226,14 +226,13 @@ static struct usb_device_id blacklist_table[] = {
>  #define BTUSB_ISOC_RUNNING	2
>  #define BTUSB_SUSPENDING	3
>  #define BTUSB_DID_ISO_RESUME	4
> -#define BTUSB_FIRMWARE_DONE	5
> +#define BTUSB_FIRMWARE_DONE	7
>  
>  struct btusb_data {
>  	struct hci_dev       *hdev;
>  	struct usb_device    *udev;
>  	struct usb_interface *intf;
>  	struct usb_interface *isoc;
> -	const struct usb_device_id *id;
>  
>  	spinlock_t lock;
>  
> @@ -938,24 +937,20 @@ static void btusb_waker(struct work_struct *work)
>  	usb_autopm_put_interface(data->intf);
>  }
>  
> -#define PATCHRAM_TIMEOUT	1000
>  #define PATCHRAM_NAME_LEN	20
> +#define PATCHRAM_BUF_SIZE	(256 + 4)
>  
>  static void btusb_load_firmware(struct hci_dev *hdev)
>  {
>  	struct btusb_data *data = hci_get_drvdata(hdev);
>  	struct usb_device *udev = data->udev;
> -	const struct usb_device_id *id = data->id;
>  	size_t pos = 0;
>  	int err = 0;
>  	char filename[PATCHRAM_NAME_LEN];
>  	const struct firmware *fw;
> +	u8 *buf = NULL;
> +	u8 val = 0;
>  
> -	unsigned char reset_cmd[] = { 0x03, 0x0c, 0x00 };
> -	unsigned char download_cmd[] = { 0x2e, 0xfc, 0x00 };
> -
> -	if (!(id->driver_info & BTUSB_BCM_PATCHRAM))
> -		return;

If you remove these 2 lines then it seems that all Bluetooth adapters
will get the PATCHRAM treatment, regardless of the quirk setting in
btusb_table[].

Have you done any regression testing on Bluetooth adapters that don't
require PATCHRAM support ?

rtg

-- 
Tim Gardner tim.gardner at canonical.com