FAILED: patch "[PATCH] iwlwifi: add new cards for So and Qu family" failed to apply to 5.11-stable tree
Subsystems (2)
[email protected]
maintainerThe patch below does not apply to the 5.11-stable tree.
If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit id to <[email protected]>.
thanks,
greg k-h
------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------
From 410f758529bc227b186ba0846bcc75ac0700ffb2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ihab Zhaika <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2021 13:01:10 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] iwlwifi: add new cards for So and Qu family
add few PCI ID'S for So with Hr and Qu with Hr in AX family.
drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/cfg/22000.c +18 -0
@@ -682,6 +682,24 @@ const struct iwl_cfg iwl_cfg_snj_a0_mr_a0 = { .num_rbds = IWL_NUM_RBDS_AX210_HE, }; +const struct iwl_cfg iwl_cfg_so_a0_hr_a0 = { + .fw_name_pre =IWL_SO_A_HR_B_FW_PRE , +IWL_DEVICE_AX210 , + .num_rbds =IWL_NUM_RBDS_AX210_HE , +}; + +const struct iwl_cfg iwl_cfg_quz_a0_hr_b0 = { + .fw_name_pre =IWL_QUZ_A_HR_B_FW_PRE , +IWL_DEVICE_22500 , +/* +* This device doesn't support receiving BlockAck with a large bitmap +* so we need to restrict the size of transmitted aggregation to the +* HT size; mac80211 would otherwise pick the HE max (256) by default. +*/ + .max_tx_agg_size =IEEE80211_MAX_AMPDU_BUF_HT , + .num_rbds =IWL_NUM_RBDS_22000_HE , +}; +MODULE_FIRMWARE (IWL_QU_B_HR_B_MODULE_FIRMWARE (IWL_22000_UCODE_API_MAX ));MODULE_FIRMWARE (IWL_QNJ_B_HR_B_MODULE_FIRMWARE (IWL_22000_UCODE_API_MAX ));MODULE_FIRMWARE (IWL_QU_C_HR_B_MODULE_FIRMWARE (IWL_22000_UCODE_API_MAX ));
drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/iwl-config.h +2 -0
@@ -609,6 +609,8 @@ extern const struct iwl_cfg iwl_cfg_snj_a0_jf_b0;extern const struct iwl_cfg iwl_cfg_ma_a0_gf_a0;extern const struct iwl_cfg iwl_cfg_ma_a0_mr_a0;extern const struct iwl_cfg iwl_cfg_snj_a0_mr_a0; +extern const struct iwl_cfg iwl_cfg_so_a0_hr_a0; +extern const struct iwl_cfg iwl_cfg_quz_a0_hr_b0;#endif /* CONFIG_IWLMVM */ #endif /* __IWL_CONFIG_H__ */
drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/drv.c +26 -0
@@ -926,6 +926,11 @@ static const struct iwl_dev_info iwl_dev_info_table[] = { IWL_CFG_RF_TYPE_HR1, IWL_CFG_ANY, IWL_CFG_ANY, IWL_CFG_ANY, iwl_quz_a0_hr1_b0, iwl_ax101_name), +_IWL_DEV_INFO (IWL_CFG_ANY ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_MAC_TYPE_QUZ ,SILICON_B_STEP , +IWL_CFG_RF_TYPE_HR2 ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_NO_160 ,IWL_CFG_ANY , + iwl_cfg_quz_a0_hr_b0, iwl_ax203_name),/* QnJ with Hr */ _IWL_DEV_INFO(IWL_CFG_ANY, IWL_CFG_ANY,
@@ -997,6 +1002,27 @@ static const struct iwl_dev_info iwl_dev_info_table[] = { IWL_CFG_ANY, IWL_CFG_ANY, iwl_cfg_snj_a0_mr_a0, iwl_ma_name), +/* So with Hr */ +_IWL_DEV_INFO (IWL_CFG_ANY ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_MAC_TYPE_SO ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_RF_TYPE_HR2 ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_NO_160 ,IWL_CFG_ANY , + iwl_cfg_so_a0_hr_a0, iwl_ax203_name), +_IWL_DEV_INFO (IWL_CFG_ANY ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_MAC_TYPE_SO ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_RF_TYPE_HR2 ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_NO_160 ,IWL_CFG_ANY , + iwl_cfg_so_a0_hr_a0, iwl_ax203_name), +_IWL_DEV_INFO (IWL_CFG_ANY ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_MAC_TYPE_SO ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_RF_TYPE_HR1 ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_160 ,IWL_CFG_ANY , + iwl_cfg_so_a0_hr_a0, iwl_ax101_name), +_IWL_DEV_INFO (IWL_CFG_ANY ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_MAC_TYPE_SO ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_RF_TYPE_HR2 ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_160 ,IWL_CFG_ANY , + iwl_cfg_so_a0_hr_a0, iwl_ax201_name)#endif /* CONFIG_IWLMVM */ };
Hi Greg,
I tried to apply this path on the latest linux-5.11.y branch (27e543cca13fab05689b2d0d61d200a83cfb00b6) and it applied cleanly.
Maybe there are other queued patches that are conflicting with this? Is there a branch somewhere that I should use?
--
Cheers,
Luca.
Quoted 115 lines · On Mon, 2021-03-01 at 11:13 +0100, [email protected] wrote:
The patch below does not apply to the 5.11-stable tree.
If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit id to <[email protected]>.thanks,
greg k-h
------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------
From
410f758529bc227b186ba0846bcc75ac0700ffb2Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ihab Zhaika <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2021 13:01:10 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] iwlwifi: add new cards for So and Qu familyadd few PCI ID'S for So with Hr and Qu with Hr in AX family.
Signed-off-by Ihab Zhaika <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Luca Coelho <[email protected]>drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/cfg/22000.c +0
-0@@ -682,6 +682,24 @@ const struct iwl_cfg iwl_cfg_snj_a0_mr_a0 = { .num_rbds = IWL_NUM_RBDS_AX210_HE, };drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/cfg/22000.c +18
-0+const struct iwl_cfg iwl_cfg_so_a0_hr_a0 = { + .fw_name_pre =IWL_SO_A_HR_B_FW_PRE , +IWL_DEVICE_AX210 , + .num_rbds =IWL_NUM_RBDS_AX210_HE , +}; + +const struct iwl_cfg iwl_cfg_quz_a0_hr_b0 = { + .fw_name_pre =IWL_QUZ_A_HR_B_FW_PRE , +IWL_DEVICE_22500 , +/* +* This device doesn't support receiving BlockAck with a large bitmap +* so we need to restrict the size of transmitted aggregation to the +* HT size; mac80211 would otherwise pick the HE max (256) by default. +*/ + .max_tx_agg_size =IEEE80211_MAX_AMPDU_BUF_HT , + .num_rbds =IWL_NUM_RBDS_22000_HE , +}; +MODULE_FIRMWARE(IWL_QU_B_HR_B_MODULE_FIRMWARE(IWL_22000_UCODE_API_MAX)); MODULE_FIRMWARE(IWL_QNJ_B_HR_B_MODULE_FIRMWARE(IWL_22000_UCODE_API_MAX)); MODULE_FIRMWARE(IWL_QU_C_HR_B_MODULE_FIRMWARE(IWL_22000_UCODE_API_MAX));
drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/iwl-config.h +2
-0@@ -609,6 +609,8 @@ extern const struct iwl_cfg iwl_cfg_snj_a0_jf_b0; extern const struct iwl_cfg iwl_cfg_ma_a0_gf_a0; extern const struct iwl_cfg iwl_cfg_ma_a0_mr_a0; extern const struct iwl_cfg iwl_cfg_snj_a0_mr_a0; +extern const struct iwl_cfg iwl_cfg_so_a0_hr_a0; +extern const struct iwl_cfg iwl_cfg_quz_a0_hr_b0; #endif /* CONFIG_IWLMVM */#endif /*
__IWL_CONFIG_H__*/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/drv.c +5
-0@@ -926,6 +926,11 @@ static const struct iwl_dev_info iwl_dev_info_table[] = { IWL_CFG_RF_TYPE_HR1, IWL_CFG_ANY, IWL_CFG_ANY, IWL_CFG_ANY, iwl_quz_a0_hr1_b0, iwl_ax101_name), +_IWL_DEV_INFO (IWL_CFG_ANY ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_MAC_TYPE_QUZ ,SILICON_B_STEP , +IWL_CFG_RF_TYPE_HR2 ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_NO_160 ,IWL_CFG_ANY , + iwl_cfg_quz_a0_hr_b0, iwl_ax203_name),/* QnJ with Hr */
_IWL_DEV_INFO(IWL_CFG_ANY,IWL_CFG_ANY,drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/drv.c +0
-0@@ -997,6 +1002,27 @@ static const struct iwl_dev_info iwl_dev_info_table[] = { IWL_CFG_ANY, IWL_CFG_ANY, iwl_cfg_snj_a0_mr_a0, iwl_ma_name),drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/drv.c +21
-0+/* So with Hr */ +_IWL_DEV_INFO (IWL_CFG_ANY ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_MAC_TYPE_SO ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_RF_TYPE_HR2 ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_NO_160 ,IWL_CFG_ANY , + iwl_cfg_so_a0_hr_a0, iwl_ax203_name), +_IWL_DEV_INFO (IWL_CFG_ANY ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_MAC_TYPE_SO ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_RF_TYPE_HR2 ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_NO_160 ,IWL_CFG_ANY , + iwl_cfg_so_a0_hr_a0, iwl_ax203_name), +_IWL_DEV_INFO (IWL_CFG_ANY ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_MAC_TYPE_SO ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_RF_TYPE_HR1 ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_160 ,IWL_CFG_ANY , + iwl_cfg_so_a0_hr_a0, iwl_ax101_name), +_IWL_DEV_INFO (IWL_CFG_ANY ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_MAC_TYPE_SO ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_RF_TYPE_HR2 ,IWL_CFG_ANY , +IWL_CFG_160 ,IWL_CFG_ANY , + iwl_cfg_so_a0_hr_a0, iwl_ax201_name)#endif /*
CONFIG_IWLMVM*/
};
[email protected]
maintainerQuoted 7 lines · Luciano
Hi Greg,
I tried to apply this path on the latest linux-5.11.y branch (
27e543cca13fab05689b2d0d61d200a83cfb00b6) and it applied cleanly.Maybe there are other queued patches that are conflicting with this? Is there a branch somewhere that I should use?
It applies cleanly, but you failed to build the kernel with that patch applied to see the error that it causes :(
greg k-h
Quoted 11 lines · On Tue, 2021-03-02 at 15:35 +0100, [email protected] wrote:
Quoted 7 lines · Luciano
Hi Greg,
I tried to apply this path on the latest linux-5.11.y branch (
27e543cca13fab05689b2d0d61d200a83cfb00b6) and it applied cleanly.Maybe there are other queued patches that are conflicting with this? Is there a branch somewhere that I should use?
It applies cleanly, but you failed to build the kernel with that patch applied to see the error that it causes :(
Oops, sorry! I'll fix the compilation issue and submit.
Thanks for the quick response.
--
Cheers,
Luca.