RE: [RESEND PATCH 1/1] drm/i915/glk: Add MODULE_FIRMWARE for Geminilake

[Botello Ortega, Luis]

Hi all:

We tested GLK DMC 1.04 FW in last week of September 2017, using the latest drm-tip version for that time (4.14.0-rc2) and according to our results we could declare this FW as acceptable and healthy to be used with kernel version 4.14 . 
However, we cannot guarantee quality and healthy of this FW if it is used in top of current drm-tip kernel (4.17-rc0).

Best Regards
Luis Botello


-----Original Message-----
From: Srivatsa, Anusha 
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2018 1:30 PM
To: Vivi, Rodrigo <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx>; Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Botello Ortega, Luis <luis.botello.ortega@xxxxxxxxx>; Martinez Monroy, Elio <elio.martinez.monroy@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Ian W MORRISON <ianwmorrison@xxxxxxxxx>; airlied@xxxxxxxx; Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Wajdeczko, Michal <Michal.Wajdeczko@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [RESEND PATCH 1/1] drm/i915/glk: Add MODULE_FIRMWARE for Geminilake



>-----Original Message-----
>From: Vivi, Rodrigo
>Sent: Friday, April 20, 2018 11:04 AM
>To: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Cc: Srivatsa, Anusha <anusha.srivatsa@xxxxxxxxx>; Ian W MORRISON 
><ianwmorrison@xxxxxxxxx>; airlied@xxxxxxxx; Greg KH 
><gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- 
>kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dri- 
>devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Wajdeczko, Michal 
><Michal.Wajdeczko@xxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH 1/1] drm/i915/glk: Add MODULE_FIRMWARE for 
>Geminilake
>
>On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 12:02:52PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> On Mon, 16 Apr 2018, "Srivatsa, Anusha" <anusha.srivatsa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >>-----Original Message-----
>> >>From: Jani Nikula [mailto:jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> >>Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 5:27 AM
>> >>To: Ian W MORRISON <ianwmorrison@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >>Cc: Vivi, Rodrigo <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx>; Srivatsa, Anusha 
>> >><anusha.srivatsa@xxxxxxxxx>; Wajdeczko, Michal 
>> >><Michal.Wajdeczko@xxxxxxxxx>; Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; 
>> >>airlied@xxxxxxxx; joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; 
>> >>linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; 
>> >>intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dri- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >>Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH 1/1] drm/i915/glk: Add MODULE_FIRMWARE 
>> >>for Geminilake
>> >>
>> >>On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Ian W MORRISON <ianwmorrison@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >>> <snip>
>> >>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> NAK on indiscriminate Cc: stable. There are zero guarantees that 
>> >>>> older kernels will work with whatever firmware you throw at them.
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> I included 'Cc: stable' so the patch would get added to the v4.16 
>> >>> and
>> >>> v4.15 kernels which I have tested with the patch. I found that 
>> >>> earlier kernels didn't support the 'linux-firmware' package 
>> >>> required to get wifi working on Intel's new Gemini Lake NUC.
>> >>
>> >>You realize that this patch should have nothing to do with wifi?
>> >>
>> >>Rodrigo, Anusha, if you think Cc: stable is appropriate, please 
>> >>indicate the specific versions of stable it is appropriate for.
>> >
>> > Hi Jani,
>> >
>> > The stable kernel version is 4.12 and beyond.
>> > It is appropriate to add the CC: stable in my opinion
>>
>> Who tested the firmware with v4.12 and later? We only have the CI 
>> results against *current* drm-tip. We don't even know about v4.16.
>>
>
>I understand your concerns, but the problem was that our old process 
>was a bit
>(lot?) messed and there was the unreliable time until the firmware 
>really lands on linux-firmware.git. So MODULE_FIRMWARE call was only 
>added after firmware was really there on firmware repository but it wasn't about the testing.
>
>In other words, the bump version patch was merged after tested, but 
>MODULE_FIRMWARE was left behind because firmware blob took a while to 
>get pulled into linux-firmware.git and we end up forgetting to add it there.
>
>In my opinion it should be safe to add the MODULE_FIRMWARE there based 
>on the tests from when the version was bumped.

Luis, Elio, can you guys confirm that this firmware is tested and healthy? And also, give a tested-by to this patch please?

Thanks,
Anusha 
>> I'm not going to ack and take responsibility for the stable backports 
>> unless someone actually comes forward with credible Tested-bys.
>>
>> BR,
>> Jani.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Anusha
>> >>BR,
>> >>Jani.
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> PS. How is this a "RESEND"? I haven't seen this before.
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> It is a 'RESEND' for that very reason. I initially sent the patch 
>> >>> to the same people as a similar patch
>> >>> (https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10143637/) however after 
>> >>> realising this omitted required addresses I added them and resent 
>> >>> the
>patch.
>> >>>
>> >>> Best regards,
>> >>> Ian
>> >>
>> >>--
>> >>Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center
>>
>> --
>> Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center 
>> _______________________________________________
>> dri-devel mailing list
>> dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel