BT_RAM_CODE_MT7961_1a_2_hdr.bin is missing in the firmware tree

BT_RAM_CODE_MT7961_1a_2_hdr.bin is missing in the firmware tree

[Artem S. Tashkinov]

Hello guys,

Could you please push this firmware ASAP?

It's been reported to be missing:
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=218757



Regards,
Artem

Re: BT_RAM_CODE_MT7961_1a_2_hdr.bin is missing in the firmware tree

[Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)]

On 23.04.24 12:23, Artem S. Tashkinov wrote:
> 
> Could you please push this firmware ASAP?
> 
> It's been reported to be missing:
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=218757

FWIW, that can't be the only solution for that problem, as
Documentation/driver-api/firmware/firmware-usage-guidelines.rst clearly
states:

"""
Users switching to a newer kernel should *not* have to install newer
firmware files to keep their hardware working.
"""

Could anyone from mediatek please confirm that this rule is adhered?

Side note: I wonder if Peter's patch
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240415141922.25055-1-peter.tsao@mediatek.com/
("Bluetooth: btusb: Fix the patch for MT7920 the affected to MT7921") is
relevant for this.

Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'the Linux kernel's regression tracker' hat)
--
Everything you wanna know about Linux kernel regression tracking:
https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/about/#tldr
If I did something stupid, please tell me, as explained on that page.

Re: [SPAM]Re: BT_RAM_CODE_MT7961_1a_2_hdr.bin is missing in the firmware tree

[Peter Tsao (曹珆彰)]

Dear Thorsten,

Sorry for the misunderstanding.
MT7920 and MT7921 are different chip (hardware) but both use same
chip_id 0x7961 and we distinguish between these two chip through the
8th bit of the "fw_flavor" register.
Therefore, I think we have not violated this rule:
> Users switching to a newer kernel should *not* have to install newer
> firmware files to keep their hardware working.
because MT7921 still be MT7921 and use same FW bin
BT_RAM_MT7961_1_2_hdr.bin.

About MT7920, we will push the stable FW bin after internal test done.

BRs
Peter

On Wed, 2024-04-24 at 08:06 +0200, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten
Leemhuis) wrote:
> On 23.04.24 12:23, Artem S. Tashkinov wrote:
> > 
> > Could you please push this firmware ASAP?
> > 
> > It's been reported to be missing:
> > 
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=218757__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!jL88juHMcB9CkhfQy00tGVjWsRXXdMN-_T28ANIP1xdw0C5Yr2dENm0mM3n9Egv5xqdT7oDyEXtOswJ6o2EYZSw9h_v5$
> >  
> 
> FWIW, that can't be the only solution for that problem, as
> Documentation/driver-api/firmware/firmware-usage-guidelines.rst
> clearly
> states:
> 
> """
> Users switching to a newer kernel should *not* have to install newer
> firmware files to keep their hardware working.
> """
> 
> Could anyone from mediatek please confirm that this rule is adhered?
> 
> Side note: I wonder if Peter's patch
> 
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240415141922.25055-1-peter.tsao@mediatek.com/
> ("Bluetooth: btusb: Fix the patch for MT7920 the affected to MT7921")
> is
> relevant for this.
> 
> Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'the Linux kernel's regression tracker'
> hat)
> --
> Everything you wanna know about Linux kernel regression tracking:
> 
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/about/*tldr__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!jL88juHMcB9CkhfQy00tGVjWsRXXdMN-_T28ANIP1xdw0C5Yr2dENm0mM3n9Egv5xqdT7oDyEXtOswJ6o2EYZXhunwKm$
>  
> If I did something stupid, please tell me, as explained on that page.