On 10/25/26 08:37, Christoph Zwerschke wrote: > On 25.10.26 07:27, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> Feels wrong to me, as >> Documentation/driver-api/firmware/firmware-usage-guidelines.rst says >> "Users switching to a newer kernel should *not* have to install newer >> firmware files to keep their hardware working.". So what those three >> commits did in mainline even there could be considered a >> mistake/regression. No worries, mistakes happen. And reverting it now in >> mainline would do more damage than good. But overall it feels wrong to >> bring that mistake over to older stable series. > > I can confirm the analysis: [...]
Thx for taking the time explaining this in details to us, much appreciated! > [...] > Regarding your concern that a revert in mainline would do more damage > than good: on 7.3 I also compared both variants (with and without the > ID entries) with the BT600 for HFP and LE Audio (BlueZ 5.87, PipeWire > 1.6.10). mSBC is negotiated and used even without the wide-band-speech > flag, and I found no difference between ROM and loaded firmware. So > for these two adapters I could not find any damage from reverting the > ID entries in mainline. Of course this does not rule out that the > loaded firmware contains fixes or improvements that my tests did not > cover. > [...] > If it helps, I can send reverts of 980084de4d9b and 6f0624b4427e > (on top of bluetooth.git master, with Cc: stable). Alternatively, > btrtl could fall back to the ROM firmware when rtl8761cu_fw.bin > is missing. I didn't see any regression reports for 7.x releases about those changes, as I suspect that people that regularly switch to the latest stable or mainline releases often update their firmware package, too. So I'm still inclined to say: leave everything as it is in mainline to avoid any risk and revert only the backports of those two in 6.18.y and 6.12.y. Ciao, Thorsten
