why are these drivers missing from the Fedora kernel?

[Ranjan Maitra]

Hi,

I posted this earlier but did not get a response, so here's hoping that someone who notices has more suggestions.

I am a long-time Fedora user since Fedora Core 1 and I am looking at installing Fedora 22 on a MS Surface Pro 3 with Type Cover. But in order to do that (and to have the cover recognized), I noticed that the file linux-***/drivers/hid/hid-ids.h in the kernel from kernel.org is missing. This is however available at kcbench (which is the kernel compiled for benchmarking). I was wondering what the reasoning behind this is, because we can not have the Type Cover 3 recognized with the LiveCD while installing (and so installing without a keyboard is a major hassle). Not to mention, kcbench draws in over 500 MB with a dnf update.

Also, is this the correct arena for discussing linux-firmware? If not, I apologize. If it is, I was looking at:

/lib/firmware/mrvl

which is provided by the linux-firmware rpm and I noticed that it is missing some files:

This is what is in my updated files list:

pcie8897_uapsta.bin  sd8797_uapsta.bin  usb8766_uapsta.bin
sd8688.bin           sd8887_uapsta.bin  usb8797_uapsta.bin
sd8688_helper.bin    sd8897_uapsta.bin  usb8897_uapsta.bin

However, the list here (git://git.marvell.com/mwifiex-firmware.git) have some more -- here is thelist:

pcie8897_uapsta.bin  sd8797_uapsta.bin   usb8766_uapsta.bin*
sd8688.bin           sd8801_uapsta.bin*  usb8797_uapsta.bin
sd8688_helper.bin    sd8887_uapsta.bin*  usb8801_uapsta.bin*
sd8787_uapsta.bin    sd8897_uapsta.bin   usb8897_uapsta.bin

So, I was wondering: why are some of the files missing? Is it because of non-OSS issues? Or should I file a bug/feature request?

Many thanks,
Ranjan

____________________________________________________________
Can't remember your password? Do you need a strong and secure password?
Use Password manager! It stores your passwords & protects your account.
Check it out at http://mysecurelogon.com/manager

[Josh Boyer]

On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Ranjan Maitra
 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I posted this earlier but did not get a response, so here's hoping that someone who notices has more suggestions.

Most likely because what you've written doesn't make a whole lot of
sense.  Your email address also makes it look like you ignore it :).
> I am a long-time Fedora user since Fedora Core 1 and I am looking at installing Fedora 22 on a MS Surface Pro 3 with Type Cover. But in order to do that (and to have the cover recognized), I noticed that the file linux-***/drivers/hid/hid-ids.h in the kernel from kernel.org is missing. This is however available at kcbench (which is the

Missing from where?  What package are you referring to, because the
file is certainly in the kernel sources.
> kernel compiled for benchmarking). I was wondering what the reasoning behind this is, because we can not have the Type Cover 3 recognized with the LiveCD while installing (and so installing without a keyboard is a major hassle). Not to mention, kcbench draws in over 500 MB with a dnf update.

Maybe you could explain a bit more what you're trying to do here.  The
existence of a .h file doesn't provide a device driver.  What actual
device driver are you looking for, and why do you think you need the
hid-ids.h file?
> Also, is this the correct arena for discussing linux-firmware? If not, I apologize. If it is, I was looking at:
>
> /lib/firmware/mrvl
>
> which is provided by the linux-firmware rpm and I noticed that it is missing some files:
>
> This is what is in my updated files list:
>
> pcie8897_uapsta.bin  sd8797_uapsta.bin  usb8766_uapsta.bin
> sd8688.bin           sd8887_uapsta.bin  usb8797_uapsta.bin
> sd8688_helper.bin    sd8897_uapsta.bin  usb8897_uapsta.bin
>
> However, the list here (git://git.marvell.com/mwifiex-firmware.git) have some more -- here is thelist:
>
> pcie8897_uapsta.bin  sd8797_uapsta.bin   usb8766_uapsta.bin*
> sd8688.bin           sd8801_uapsta.bin*  usb8797_uapsta.bin
> sd8688_helper.bin    sd8887_uapsta.bin*  usb8801_uapsta.bin*
> sd8787_uapsta.bin    sd8897_uapsta.bin   usb8897_uapsta.bin
>
> So, I was wondering: why are some of the files missing? Is it because of non-OSS issues? Or should I file a bug/feature request?

I don't know immediately.  It might very likely be because Marvell
hasn't sent the updated files to the upstream linux-firmware tree
maintainers yet.  You should probably ask Marvell why the sd8801* and
sd8787* files are not upstream yet.

josh

[Peter Robinson]

On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 1:34 PM, Josh Boyer  wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Ranjan Maitra
>  wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I posted this earlier but did not get a response, so here's hoping that someone who notices has more suggestions.
>
> Most likely because what you've written doesn't make a whole lot of
> sense.  Your email address also makes it look like you ignore it :).
> > I am a long-time Fedora user since Fedora Core 1 and I am looking at installing Fedora 22 on a MS Surface Pro 3 with Type Cover. But in order to do that (and to have the cover recognized), I noticed that the file linux-***/drivers/hid/hid-ids.h in the kernel from kernel.org is missing. This is however available at kcbench (which is the
>
> Missing from where?  What package are you referring to, because the
> file is certainly in the kernel sources.
> > kernel compiled for benchmarking). I was wondering what the reasoning behind this is, because we can not have the Type Cover 3 recognized with the LiveCD while installing (and so installing without a keyboard is a major hassle). Not to mention, kcbench draws in over 500 MB with a dnf update.
>
> Maybe you could explain a bit more what you're trying to do here.  The
> existence of a .h file doesn't provide a device driver.  What actual
> device driver are you looking for, and why do you think you need the
> hid-ids.h file?
> > Also, is this the correct arena for discussing linux-firmware? If not, I apologize. If it is, I was looking at:
> >
> > /lib/firmware/mrvl
> >
> > which is provided by the linux-firmware rpm and I noticed that it is missing some files:
> >
> > This is what is in my updated files list:
> >
> > pcie8897_uapsta.bin  sd8797_uapsta.bin  usb8766_uapsta.bin
> > sd8688.bin           sd8887_uapsta.bin  usb8797_uapsta.bin
> > sd8688_helper.bin    sd8897_uapsta.bin  usb8897_uapsta.bin
> >
> > However, the list here (git://git.marvell.com/mwifiex-firmware.git) have some more -- here is thelist:
> >
> > pcie8897_uapsta.bin  sd8797_uapsta.bin   usb8766_uapsta.bin*
> > sd8688.bin           sd8801_uapsta.bin*  usb8797_uapsta.bin
> > sd8688_helper.bin    sd8887_uapsta.bin*  usb8801_uapsta.bin*
> > sd8787_uapsta.bin    sd8897_uapsta.bin   usb8897_uapsta.bin
> >
> > So, I was wondering: why are some of the files missing? Is it because of non-OSS issues? Or should I file a bug/feature request?
>
> I don't know immediately.  It might very likely be because Marvell
> hasn't sent the updated files to the upstream linux-firmware tree
> maintainers yet.  You should probably ask Marvell why the sd8801* and
> sd8787* files are not upstream yet.

They are, we ship them in the libertas-sd8787-firmware package :-)

[Ranjan Maitra]

Hi,

Thank you. I am sorry that my previous e-mail was not clear.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail]
> Sent: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 08:34:27 -0400
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: why are these drivers missing from the Fedora kernel?
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Ranjan Maitra
>  wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I posted this earlier but did not get a response, so here's hoping that
> > someone who notices has more suggestions.
>
> Most likely because what you've written doesn't make a whole lot of
> sense.  Your email address also makes it look like you ignore it :).

Yes, I do ignore this e-mail address, but not the mailing list. I read it on another e-mail address but post using this one. It is my way of keeping spam down.
> > I am a long-time Fedora user since Fedora Core 1 and I am looking at
> > installing Fedora 22 on a MS Surface Pro 3 with Type Cover. But in order
> > to do that (and to have the cover recognized), I noticed that the file
> > linux-***/drivers/hid/hid-ids.h in the kernel from kernel.org is
> > missing. This is however available at kcbench (which is the
>
> Missing from where?  What package are you referring to, because the
> file is certainly in the kernel sources.

I agree. The kernel is indeed in the vanilla kernel sources. However, it is not installed with the fedora kernel.

So why does this matter? The MS Surface Type Cover 3 is not recognized at all with a Fedora 22 installation. It is recognized however, in distributions like kUbuntu. There, the dmesg gives:

[    1.866285] usb 1-3: new full-speed USB device number 2 using xhci_hcd
[    1.994694] usb 1-3: No LPM exit latency info found, disabling LPM.
[    1.996342] usb 1-3: New USB device found, idVendor=045e, idProduct=07e2
[    1.996346] usb 1-3: New USB device strings: Mfr=1, Product=2, SerialNumber=0
[    1.996349] usb 1-3: Product: Surface Type Cover
[    1.996351] usb 1-3: Manufacturer: Microsoft

Such a dmesg does not show up with Fedora 22 LiveCD.

So I looked this up:

~$ sudo dnf provides */hid-ids.h
Last metadata expiration check performed 3:56:27 ago on Tue Jun 30 08:06:19 2015.
kcbench-data-4.0-0.1-16.fc22.noarch : Kernel sources from 4.0 to be used by
                                    : kcbench
Repo        : fedora

You can see that the file is in kcbench-data (which, btw, is 525 M addiitionally (!) when installed).

I just wonder why the files/drivers are in the kernel (from kernel.org) but are not there in the Fedora 22 kernel. They seem to be there in the Ubuntu kernels.

Please let me know if I have still not been clear. I am happy to explain (and test). I would like to use F22 on my Surface Pro 3).

Best wishes,
Ranjan

____________________________________________________________
FREE 3D MARINE AQUARIUM SCREENSAVER - Watch dolphins, sharks & orcas on your desktop!
Check it out at http://www.inbox.com/marineaquarium

[Peter Robinson]

> > Missing from where?  What package are you referring to, because the
> > file is certainly in the kernel sources.
>
> I agree. The kernel is indeed in the vanilla kernel sources. However, it is not installed with the fedora kernel.
>
> So why does this matter? The MS Surface Type Cover 3 is not recognized at all with a Fedora 22 installation. It is recognized however, in distributions like kUbuntu. There, the dmesg gives:
>
> [    1.866285] usb 1-3: new full-speed USB device number 2 using xhci_hcd
> [    1.994694] usb 1-3: No LPM exit latency info found, disabling LPM.
> [    1.996342] usb 1-3: New USB device found, idVendor=045e, idProduct=07e2
> [    1.996346] usb 1-3: New USB device strings: Mfr=1, Product=2, SerialNumber=0
> [    1.996349] usb 1-3: Product: Surface Type Cover
> [    1.996351] usb 1-3: Manufacturer: Microsoft
>
> Such a dmesg does not show up with Fedora 22 LiveCD.
>
> So I looked this up:
>
> ~$ sudo dnf provides */hid-ids.h
> Last metadata expiration check performed 3:56:27 ago on Tue Jun 30 08:06:19 2015.
> kcbench-data-4.0-0.1-16.fc22.noarch : Kernel sources from 4.0 to be used by
>                                     : kcbench
> Repo        : fedora
>
> You can see that the file is in kcbench-data (which, btw, is 525 M addiitionally (!) when installed).
>
> I just wonder why the files/drivers are in the kernel (from kernel.org) but are not there in the Fedora 22 kernel. They seem to be there in the Ubuntu kernels.

The commit is upstream [1] as of November and the appropriate bits are
in our kernel. Does it work if you "modprobe hid-microsoft" ?

[1] https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=b...

[Peter Robinson]

On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 6:31 PM, Peter Robinson  wrote:
> > > Missing from where?  What package are you referring to, because the
> > > file is certainly in the kernel sources.
> >
> > I agree. The kernel is indeed in the vanilla kernel sources. However, it is not installed with the fedora kernel.
> >
> > So why does this matter? The MS Surface Type Cover 3 is not recognized at all with a Fedora 22 installation. It is recognized however, in distributions like kUbuntu. There, the dmesg gives:
> >
> > [    1.866285] usb 1-3: new full-speed USB device number 2 using xhci_hcd
> > [    1.994694] usb 1-3: No LPM exit latency info found, disabling LPM.
> > [    1.996342] usb 1-3: New USB device found, idVendor=045e, idProduct=07e2
> > [    1.996346] usb 1-3: New USB device strings: Mfr=1, Product=2, SerialNumber=0
> > [    1.996349] usb 1-3: Product: Surface Type Cover
> > [    1.996351] usb 1-3: Manufacturer: Microsoft
> >
> > Such a dmesg does not show up with Fedora 22 LiveCD.
> >
> > So I looked this up:
> >
> > ~$ sudo dnf provides */hid-ids.h
> > Last metadata expiration check performed 3:56:27 ago on Tue Jun 30 08:06:19 2015.
> > kcbench-data-4.0-0.1-16.fc22.noarch : Kernel sources from 4.0 to be used by
> >                                     : kcbench
> > Repo        : fedora
> >
> > You can see that the file is in kcbench-data (which, btw, is 525 M addiitionally (!) when installed).
> >
> > I just wonder why the files/drivers are in the kernel (from kernel.org) but are not there in the Fedora 22 kernel. They seem to be there in the Ubuntu kernels.
>
> The commit is upstream [1] as of November and the appropriate bits are
> in our kernel. Does it work if you "modprobe hid-microsoft" ?

Actually it looks like you have a new variant " idProduct=07e2" that's
not in our kernel yet, is it a specific language layout or something?

[Ranjan Maitra]

On Tue, 30 Jun 2015 18:39:11 +0100 Peter Robinson  wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 6:31 PM, Peter Robinson  wrote:
> > > > Missing from where?  What package are you referring to, because the
> > > > file is certainly in the kernel sources.
> > >
> > > I agree. The kernel is indeed in the vanilla kernel sources. However, it is not installed with the fedora kernel.
> > >
> > > So why does this matter? The MS Surface Type Cover 3 is not recognized at all with a Fedora 22 installation. It is recognized however, in distributions like kUbuntu. There, the dmesg gives:
> > >
> > > [    1.877685] usb 1-3: new full-speed USB device number 2 using xhci_hcd
> > > [    1.995794] usb 1-3: No LPM exit latency info found, disabling LPM.
> > > [    1.996542] usb 1-3: New USB device found, idVendor=045e, idProduct=07e2
> > > [    1.996546] usb 1-3: New USB device strings: Mfr=1, Product=2, SerialNumber=0
> > > [    1.996549] usb 1-3: Product: Surface Type Cover
> > > [    1.996551] usb 1-3: Manufacturer: Microsoft
> > >
> > > Such a dmesg does not show up with Fedora 22 LiveCD.
> > >
> > > So I looked this up:
> > >
> > > ~$ sudo dnf provides */hid-ids.h
> > > Last metadata expiration check performed 3:56:27 ago on Tue Jun 30 08:06:19 2015.
> > > kcbench-data-4.0-0.1-16.fc22.noarch : Kernel sources from 4.0 to be used by
> > >                                     : kcbench
> > > Repo        : fedora
> > >
> > > You can see that the file is in kcbench-data (which, btw, is 525 M addiitionally (!) when installed).
> > >
> > > I just wonder why the files/drivers are in the kernel (from kernel.org) but are not there in the Fedora 22 kernel. They seem to be there in the Ubuntu kernels.
> >
> > The commit is upstream [1] as of November and the appropriate bits are
> > in our kernel. Does it work if you "modprobe hid-microsoft" ?

Should I try this with the LiveCD? Or after installation (I have not actually had the courage to install F22 on my surface yet, sorry.)
> Actually it looks like you have a new variant " idProduct=07e2" that's
> not in our kernel yet, is it a specific language layout or something?

Yes, this may be a new thing. I also found this on the kernel bugzilla so this Type Cover 3 may be a newer version of the old product.

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100341

I bought mine in the US as did the bugzilla reporting guy. I am going to try and see if the IT department in my office has an older Type Cover 3 and see what that gets me.

Thanks again!

Best wishes,
Ranjan
> kernel mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel

[Josh Boyer]

On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Ranjan Maitra
 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thank you. I am sorry that my previous e-mail was not clear.
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [e-mail]
> > Sent: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 08:34:27 -0400
> > To: [e-mail]
> > Subject: Re: why are these drivers missing from the Fedora kernel?
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Ranjan Maitra
> >  wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I posted this earlier but did not get a response, so here's hoping that
> > > someone who notices has more suggestions.
> >
> > Most likely because what you've written doesn't make a whole lot of
> > sense.  Your email address also makes it look like you ignore it :).
>
> Yes, I do ignore this e-mail address, but not the mailing list. I read it on another e-mail address but post using this one. It is my way of keeping spam down.
> > > I am a long-time Fedora user since Fedora Core 1 and I am looking at
> > > installing Fedora 22 on a MS Surface Pro 3 with Type Cover. But in order
> > > to do that (and to have the cover recognized), I noticed that the file
> > > linux-***/drivers/hid/hid-ids.h in the kernel from kernel.org is
> > > missing. This is however available at kcbench (which is the
> >
> > Missing from where?  What package are you referring to, because the
> > file is certainly in the kernel sources.
>
> I agree. The kernel is indeed in the vanilla kernel sources. However, it is not installed with the fedora kernel.

Because it is a source file, and the kernel package provides binaries.
The hid-ids.h file is internal to the kernel sources.  It is in the
Fedora kernel sources, just as it is in the vanilla kernel.org
sources.
> So why does this matter? The MS Surface Type Cover 3 is not recognized at all with a Fedora 22 installation. It is recognized however, in distributions like kUbuntu. There, the dmesg gives:
>
> [    1.866285] usb 1-3: new full-speed USB device number 2 using xhci_hcd
> [    1.994694] usb 1-3: No LPM exit latency info found, disabling LPM.
> [    1.996342] usb 1-3: New USB device found, idVendor=045e, idProduct=07e2
> [    1.996346] usb 1-3: New USB device strings: Mfr=1, Product=2, SerialNumber=0
> [    1.996349] usb 1-3: Product: Surface Type Cover
> [    1.996351] usb 1-3: Manufacturer: Microsoft

Can you provide the full output of dmesg from the kernel that displays
that?  Can you also provide the full output of dmesg from the Fedora
kernel?
> Such a dmesg does not show up with Fedora 22 LiveCD.

Because upstream doesn't have support for device ID 07e2, which is
what your cover is reporting.  Which means whatever distribution you
saw that with above is carrying an out of tree patch.
> So I looked this up:
>
> ~$ sudo dnf provides */hid-ids.h
> Last metadata expiration check performed 3:56:27 ago on Tue Jun 30 08:06:19 2015.
> kcbench-data-4.0-0.1-16.fc22.noarch : Kernel sources from 4.0 to be used by
>                                     : kcbench
> Repo        : fedora
>
> You can see that the file is in kcbench-data (which, btw, is 525 M addiitionally (!) when installed).

That is irrelevant.  I have no idea what kcbench-data is, but it doesn't matter.
> I just wonder why the files/drivers are in the kernel (from kernel.org) but are not there in the Fedora 22 kernel. They seem to be there in the Ubuntu kernels.

You keep stating this incorrectly.  The files are in the kernel
sources in Fedora.  They are not missing.  However, they do not have
support for the device ID your cover is reporting.
> Please let me know if I have still not been clear. I am happy to explain (and test). I would like to use F22 on my Surface Pro 3).

You might have success with that if we can track down the patch that
adds support for that device, but it will need to come via an update
after installation.

josh

[Jóhann B. Guðmundsson]

On 06/30/2015 06:14 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> You might have success with that if we can track down the patch that
> adds support for that device, but it will need to come via an update
> after installation.

I dont think anyone has submitted a patch for this one yet

There was one patch submitted for 07de ( sometime in May  ) but that 
patch removed the previous ( and current ) entry "07dc" and replaced it 
with that one [¹].

When Jiri asked the submitter why he did that ( as opposed to simply add 
the new device entry to the pool of existing ones, since obviously the 
other manufactored  Surface Pro 3 devices in circulation should still 
continue to work ) the submitter did not respond, then he resubmitted 
the same patch sometime later, Jiri re-asked the same question again and 
the submitter came up with no practical reason why he submitted it as is.

If the intent is to support it, both those device entries should be 
added ( 07de and 07e2 followed by someone who actually owns these 
devices to test this ) with all three exist in total, with whatever 
multiple PIDs naming scheme is used upstream

#define USB_DEVICE_ID_MS_TYPE_COVER_3
#define USB_DEVICE_ID_MS_TYPE_COVER_3_07de
#define USB_DEVICE_ID_MS_TYPE_COVER_3_07e2

Or rework them to look the same

#define USB_DEVICE_ID_MS_TYPE_COVER_3_07dc
#define USB_DEVICE_ID_MS_TYPE_COVER_3_07de
#define USB_DEVICE_ID_MS_TYPE_COVER_3_07e2

etc

JBG

1. https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=97951

[Ranjan Maitra]

On Wed, 1 Jul 2015 14:14:59 +0000 Jóhann B. Guðmundsson  wrote:
> On 06/30/2015 06:14 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > You might have success with that if we can track down the patch that
> > adds support for that device, but it will need to come via an update
> > after installation.
>
> I dont think anyone has submitted a patch for this one yet
>
> There was one patch submitted for 07de ( sometime in May  ) but that 
> patch removed the previous ( and current ) entry "07dc" and replaced it 
> with that one [¹].
>
> When Jiri asked the submitter why he did that ( as opposed to simply add 
> the new device entry to the pool of existing ones, since obviously the 
> other manufactored  Surface Pro 3 devices in circulation should still 
> continue to work ) the submitter did not respond, then he resubmitted 
> the same patch sometime later, Jiri re-asked the same question again and 
> the submitter came up with no practical reason why he submitted it as is.
>
> If the intent is to support it, both those device entries should be 
> added ( 07de and 07e2 followed by someone who actually owns these 
> devices to test this ) with all three exist in total, with whatever 
> multiple PIDs naming scheme is used upstream
>
> #define USB_DEVICE_ID_MS_TYPE_COVER_3
> #define USB_DEVICE_ID_MS_TYPE_COVER_3_07de
> #define USB_DEVICE_ID_MS_TYPE_COVER_3_07e2
>
> Or rework them to look the same
>
> #define USB_DEVICE_ID_MS_TYPE_COVER_3_07dc
> #define USB_DEVICE_ID_MS_TYPE_COVER_3_07de
> #define USB_DEVICE_ID_MS_TYPE_COVER_3_07e2
>
> etc
>
> JBG

Johann,

I totally agree with you that both those devices should be added for support. Let me know if I can help test.

Best wishes,
Ranjan

____________________________________________________________
Can't remember your password? Do you need a strong and secure password?
Use Password manager! It stores your passwords & protects your account.
Check it out at http://mysecurelogon.com/manager