Re: Question to recent Qualcomm CVEs
On Thursday, 2 May 2024 09:25:03 CEST Sven Eckelmann wrote: > On Monday, 29 April 2024 15:36:47 CEST Sven Eckelmann wrote: > > On Monday, 29 April 2024 15:14:18 CEST Kalle Valo wrote: > > > It's quite strange that they updated 2.5.0.1 branch first but my > > > understanding that there should be updates for the newer 2.7.0.1 branch > > > as well (2.7.0.1 branch is also in linux-firmware). > > > > Yes, I also told them in the support ticket that this is from an older > > branch > > than what is currently shipped in linux-firmware.git. But they told me > > that they are working on newer versions (whatever that means) - but they > > wanted to handle first the update to ATH.11.4 (2.5.0.x) and then > > step-by-step release it for newer firmware branches. It seem like that > > would be > > up to 2.9.0.x - no idea why there is no (public) 2.10.x/2.11.x for the AP > > SoCs. > > Just as info: The non-public QCA ticket was simply closed on Tuesday (without > having any upload which works for Robert and is from the same/newer branch > than what is currently in linux-firmware.git). So maybe we are actually out > of > luck. Now they are (indirectly) claiming that WLAN.HK.2.9.0.1-* is for ath12k. You can actually read the response like everything newer than WLAN.HK.2.5.0.1-* is for ath12k. Maybe I missed something and somebody can point out my error. Btw. their ATH.11.5 release already a newer version than WLAN.HK.2.5.0.1-*. And maybe someone else known why there is a WLAN.HK.2.11.0.1-* and WLAN.HK.2.10.0.1-* [1] for IPQ9574 but not for any other 802.11ax HW. Maybe it has to do with the fact that it is used together with 802.11be HW (PCIe, QCN9274?) and is therefore still actively maintained? Kind regards, Sven [1] https://github.com/quic/upstream-wifi-fw/tree/main/ath11k-firmware/IPQ9574/hw1.0 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: Question to recent Qualcomm CVEs
On Monday, 29 April 2024 15:36:47 CEST Sven Eckelmann wrote: > On Monday, 29 April 2024 15:14:18 CEST Kalle Valo wrote: > > It's quite strange that they updated 2.5.0.1 branch first but my > > understanding that there should be updates for the newer 2.7.0.1 branch > > as well (2.7.0.1 branch is also in linux-firmware). > > Yes, I also told them in the support ticket that this is from an older branch > than what is currently shipped in linux-firmware.git. But they told me > that they are working on newer versions (whatever that means) - but they > wanted to handle first the update to ATH.11.4 (2.5.0.x) and then > step-by-step release it for newer firmware branches. It seem like that would > be > up to 2.9.0.x - no idea why there is no (public) 2.10.x/2.11.x for the AP > SoCs. Just as info: The non-public QCA ticket was simply closed on Tuesday (without having any upload which works for Robert and is from the same/newer branch than what is currently in linux-firmware.git). So maybe we are actually out of luck. Kind regards, Sven signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: Question to recent Qualcomm CVEs
Il giorno mar 30 apr 2024 alle ore 15:04 Kalle Valo ha scritto: > > Robert Marko writes: > > > On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 at 10:48, Kalle Valo wrote: > > > >> > >> Robert Marko writes: > >> > >> > On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 at 15:37, Sven Eckelmann wrote: > >> >> > >> >> On Monday, 29 April 2024 15:14:18 CEST Kalle Valo wrote: > >> >> > It's quite strange that they updated 2.5.0.1 branch first but my > >> >> > understanding that there should be updates for the newer 2.7.0.1 > >> >> > branch > >> >> > as well (2.7.0.1 branch is also in linux-firmware). > >> >> > >> >> Yes, I also told them in the support ticket that this is from an older > >> >> branch > >> >> than what is currently shipped in linux-firmware.git. But they told me > >> >> that they are working on newer versions (whatever that means) - but they > >> >> wanted to handle first the update to ATH.11.4 (2.5.0.x) and then > >> >> step-by-step release it for newer firmware branches. It seem like that > >> >> would be > >> >> up to 2.9.0.x - no idea why there is no (public) 2.10.x/2.11.x for the > >> >> AP > >> >> SoCs. > >> > > >> > I would like to point out that IPQ6018 doesn't even have anything > >> > newer than 2.5.0.1 available publicly. > >> > >> But I do see WLAN.HK.2.7.0.1-01744-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-1 for IPQ6018: > >> > >> https://git.codelinaro.org/clo/ath-firmware/ath11k-firmware/-/tree/main/IPQ6018/hw1.0/2.7.0.1/WLAN.HK.2.7.0.1-01744-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-1?ref_type=heads > >> > >> And that release seems to be also in linux-firmware: > >> > >> File: ath11k/IPQ6018/hw1.0/q6_fw.mdt > >> Version: WLAN.HK.2.7.0.1-01744-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-1 > >> > >> Am I missing something? Or did you mean IPQ5018 which only has a release > >> from 2.6.0.1 branch? > >> > >> https://git.codelinaro.org/clo/ath-firmware/ath11k-firmware/-/tree/main/IPQ5018/hw1.0?ref_type=heads > > > > Ah yes, sorry for the confusion, I meant to say newer than 2.5.0.1 > > that actually works. > > All of the newer public FW than 2.5.0.1 that we tried in OpenWrt will > > just crash, we had the same issue with 2.6 and 2.7 FW on > > IPQ8074 and it was fixed in 2.9.0.1 but there is no 2.9.0.1 public for > > IPQ6018. > > Ah, is the issue you are talking about this bug: > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=216515 > > Or is this another issue? > Yes we wasted a good time on that and we concluded that 2.6.0 and 2.7.0 introduced breaking change in how the BDF was parsed that were fixed in 2.9.0 restoring support for legacy BDF. I think almost all ipq60xx suffer from this... Only a Qnap 301 worked with 2.6.0 - 2.7.0 (that was ipq807x) ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: Question to recent Qualcomm CVEs
On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 at 15:02, Kalle Valo wrote: > > Robert Marko writes: > > > On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 at 10:48, Kalle Valo wrote: > > > >> > >> Robert Marko writes: > >> > >> > On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 at 15:37, Sven Eckelmann wrote: > >> >> > >> >> On Monday, 29 April 2024 15:14:18 CEST Kalle Valo wrote: > >> >> > It's quite strange that they updated 2.5.0.1 branch first but my > >> >> > understanding that there should be updates for the newer 2.7.0.1 > >> >> > branch > >> >> > as well (2.7.0.1 branch is also in linux-firmware). > >> >> > >> >> Yes, I also told them in the support ticket that this is from an older > >> >> branch > >> >> than what is currently shipped in linux-firmware.git. But they told me > >> >> that they are working on newer versions (whatever that means) - but they > >> >> wanted to handle first the update to ATH.11.4 (2.5.0.x) and then > >> >> step-by-step release it for newer firmware branches. It seem like that > >> >> would be > >> >> up to 2.9.0.x - no idea why there is no (public) 2.10.x/2.11.x for the > >> >> AP > >> >> SoCs. > >> > > >> > I would like to point out that IPQ6018 doesn't even have anything > >> > newer than 2.5.0.1 available publicly. > >> > >> But I do see WLAN.HK.2.7.0.1-01744-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-1 for IPQ6018: > >> > >> https://git.codelinaro.org/clo/ath-firmware/ath11k-firmware/-/tree/main/IPQ6018/hw1.0/2.7.0.1/WLAN.HK.2.7.0.1-01744-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-1?ref_type=heads > >> > >> And that release seems to be also in linux-firmware: > >> > >> File: ath11k/IPQ6018/hw1.0/q6_fw.mdt > >> Version: WLAN.HK.2.7.0.1-01744-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-1 > >> > >> Am I missing something? Or did you mean IPQ5018 which only has a release > >> from 2.6.0.1 branch? > >> > >> https://git.codelinaro.org/clo/ath-firmware/ath11k-firmware/-/tree/main/IPQ5018/hw1.0?ref_type=heads > > > > Ah yes, sorry for the confusion, I meant to say newer than 2.5.0.1 > > that actually works. > > All of the newer public FW than 2.5.0.1 that we tried in OpenWrt will > > just crash, we had the same issue with 2.6 and 2.7 FW on > > IPQ8074 and it was fixed in 2.9.0.1 but there is no 2.9.0.1 public for > > IPQ6018. > > Ah, is the issue you are talking about this bug: > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=216515 > > Or is this another issue? Yeah, that is the issue for IPQ8074, we just skipped the 2.6 and 2.7 FW and went for 2.9. For IPQ6018 it seems that we have BDF compatibility issues with most FW newer than 2.4 or 2.5 max. Its been some time since I last checked what boards work with what FW on IPQ6018. Regards, Robert > > -- > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ > > https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: Question to recent Qualcomm CVEs
Robert Marko writes: > On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 at 10:48, Kalle Valo wrote: > >> >> Robert Marko writes: >> >> > On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 at 15:37, Sven Eckelmann wrote: >> >> >> >> On Monday, 29 April 2024 15:14:18 CEST Kalle Valo wrote: >> >> > It's quite strange that they updated 2.5.0.1 branch first but my >> >> > understanding that there should be updates for the newer 2.7.0.1 branch >> >> > as well (2.7.0.1 branch is also in linux-firmware). >> >> >> >> Yes, I also told them in the support ticket that this is from an older >> >> branch >> >> than what is currently shipped in linux-firmware.git. But they told me >> >> that they are working on newer versions (whatever that means) - but they >> >> wanted to handle first the update to ATH.11.4 (2.5.0.x) and then >> >> step-by-step release it for newer firmware branches. It seem like that >> >> would be >> >> up to 2.9.0.x - no idea why there is no (public) 2.10.x/2.11.x for the AP >> >> SoCs. >> > >> > I would like to point out that IPQ6018 doesn't even have anything >> > newer than 2.5.0.1 available publicly. >> >> But I do see WLAN.HK.2.7.0.1-01744-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-1 for IPQ6018: >> >> https://git.codelinaro.org/clo/ath-firmware/ath11k-firmware/-/tree/main/IPQ6018/hw1.0/2.7.0.1/WLAN.HK.2.7.0.1-01744-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-1?ref_type=heads >> >> And that release seems to be also in linux-firmware: >> >> File: ath11k/IPQ6018/hw1.0/q6_fw.mdt >> Version: WLAN.HK.2.7.0.1-01744-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-1 >> >> Am I missing something? Or did you mean IPQ5018 which only has a release >> from 2.6.0.1 branch? >> >> https://git.codelinaro.org/clo/ath-firmware/ath11k-firmware/-/tree/main/IPQ5018/hw1.0?ref_type=heads > > Ah yes, sorry for the confusion, I meant to say newer than 2.5.0.1 > that actually works. > All of the newer public FW than 2.5.0.1 that we tried in OpenWrt will > just crash, we had the same issue with 2.6 and 2.7 FW on > IPQ8074 and it was fixed in 2.9.0.1 but there is no 2.9.0.1 public for > IPQ6018. Ah, is the issue you are talking about this bug: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=216515 Or is this another issue? -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: Question to recent Qualcomm CVEs
On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 at 10:48, Kalle Valo wrote: > > Robert Marko writes: > > > On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 at 15:37, Sven Eckelmann wrote: > >> > >> On Monday, 29 April 2024 15:14:18 CEST Kalle Valo wrote: > >> > It's quite strange that they updated 2.5.0.1 branch first but my > >> > understanding that there should be updates for the newer 2.7.0.1 branch > >> > as well (2.7.0.1 branch is also in linux-firmware). > >> > >> Yes, I also told them in the support ticket that this is from an older > >> branch > >> than what is currently shipped in linux-firmware.git. But they told me > >> that they are working on newer versions (whatever that means) - but they > >> wanted to handle first the update to ATH.11.4 (2.5.0.x) and then > >> step-by-step release it for newer firmware branches. It seem like that > >> would be > >> up to 2.9.0.x - no idea why there is no (public) 2.10.x/2.11.x for the AP > >> SoCs. > > > > I would like to point out that IPQ6018 doesn't even have anything > > newer than 2.5.0.1 available publicly. > > But I do see WLAN.HK.2.7.0.1-01744-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-1 for IPQ6018: > > https://git.codelinaro.org/clo/ath-firmware/ath11k-firmware/-/tree/main/IPQ6018/hw1.0/2.7.0.1/WLAN.HK.2.7.0.1-01744-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-1?ref_type=heads > > And that release seems to be also in linux-firmware: > > File: ath11k/IPQ6018/hw1.0/q6_fw.mdt > Version: WLAN.HK.2.7.0.1-01744-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-1 > > Am I missing something? Or did you mean IPQ5018 which only has a release > from 2.6.0.1 branch? > > https://git.codelinaro.org/clo/ath-firmware/ath11k-firmware/-/tree/main/IPQ5018/hw1.0?ref_type=heads Ah yes, sorry for the confusion, I meant to say newer than 2.5.0.1 that actually works. All of the newer public FW than 2.5.0.1 that we tried in OpenWrt will just crash, we had the same issue with 2.6 and 2.7 FW on IPQ8074 and it was fixed in 2.9.0.1 but there is no 2.9.0.1 public for IPQ6018. Regards, Robert > > -- > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ > > https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: Question to recent Qualcomm CVEs
Robert Marko writes: > On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 at 15:37, Sven Eckelmann wrote: >> >> On Monday, 29 April 2024 15:14:18 CEST Kalle Valo wrote: >> > It's quite strange that they updated 2.5.0.1 branch first but my >> > understanding that there should be updates for the newer 2.7.0.1 branch >> > as well (2.7.0.1 branch is also in linux-firmware). >> >> Yes, I also told them in the support ticket that this is from an older branch >> than what is currently shipped in linux-firmware.git. But they told me >> that they are working on newer versions (whatever that means) - but they >> wanted to handle first the update to ATH.11.4 (2.5.0.x) and then >> step-by-step release it for newer firmware branches. It seem like that would >> be >> up to 2.9.0.x - no idea why there is no (public) 2.10.x/2.11.x for the AP >> SoCs. > > I would like to point out that IPQ6018 doesn't even have anything > newer than 2.5.0.1 available publicly. But I do see WLAN.HK.2.7.0.1-01744-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-1 for IPQ6018: https://git.codelinaro.org/clo/ath-firmware/ath11k-firmware/-/tree/main/IPQ6018/hw1.0/2.7.0.1/WLAN.HK.2.7.0.1-01744-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-1?ref_type=heads And that release seems to be also in linux-firmware: File: ath11k/IPQ6018/hw1.0/q6_fw.mdt Version: WLAN.HK.2.7.0.1-01744-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-1 Am I missing something? Or did you mean IPQ5018 which only has a release from 2.6.0.1 branch? https://git.codelinaro.org/clo/ath-firmware/ath11k-firmware/-/tree/main/IPQ5018/hw1.0?ref_type=heads -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: Question to recent Qualcomm CVEs
On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 at 15:37, Sven Eckelmann wrote: > > On Monday, 29 April 2024 15:14:18 CEST Kalle Valo wrote: > > It's quite strange that they updated 2.5.0.1 branch first but my > > understanding that there should be updates for the newer 2.7.0.1 branch > > as well (2.7.0.1 branch is also in linux-firmware). > > Yes, I also told them in the support ticket that this is from an older branch > than what is currently shipped in linux-firmware.git. But they told me > that they are working on newer versions (whatever that means) - but they > wanted to handle first the update to ATH.11.4 (2.5.0.x) and then > step-by-step release it for newer firmware branches. It seem like that would > be > up to 2.9.0.x - no idea why there is no (public) 2.10.x/2.11.x for the AP > SoCs. I would like to point out that IPQ6018 doesn't even have anything newer than 2.5.0.1 available publicly. Regards, Robert > > Kind regards, > Sven___ > openwrt-devel mailing list > openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org > https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: Question to recent Qualcomm CVEs
On Monday, 29 April 2024 15:14:18 CEST Kalle Valo wrote: > It's quite strange that they updated 2.5.0.1 branch first but my > understanding that there should be updates for the newer 2.7.0.1 branch > as well (2.7.0.1 branch is also in linux-firmware). Yes, I also told them in the support ticket that this is from an older branch than what is currently shipped in linux-firmware.git. But they told me that they are working on newer versions (whatever that means) - but they wanted to handle first the update to ATH.11.4 (2.5.0.x) and then step-by-step release it for newer firmware branches. It seem like that would be up to 2.9.0.x - no idea why there is no (public) 2.10.x/2.11.x for the AP SoCs. Kind regards, Sven signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: Question to recent Qualcomm CVEs
Kalle Valo writes: > + ath11k, jeff > > Sven Eckelmann writes: > >> On Monday, 26 February 2024 15:50:44 CET Felix Fietkau wrote: >> [...] The Qualcomm bulletin[1] says "Patches are being actively >>> > shared with OEMs". >>> > >>> > Were these bugfixes made available for OpenWRT? Is there an established >>> > procedure for such cases, where closed-source firmware gets bugfixes? >> [...] >>> > [1] >>> > https://docs.qualcomm.com/product/publicresources/securitybulletin/ >> december-2023-bulletin.html >>> >>> The fixes were not shared with OpenWrt. Qualcomm does not care about >>> OpenWrt support for their platforms. >> >> I've asked (using their qualcomm-cdmatech-support portal) for an official >> release of their WiFi firmware with all gathered bugfixes via >> linux-firmware.git. I got statements that the ath10k firmware is no longer >> supported + ath11k firmware is not developed further. But for some of them >> it >> is possible to request a release of the firmwares via Kalle's repositories. >> But also that Kalle's repositories are now replaced. Which seems to be >> confirmed by Kalle's statement [1] regarding the firmware-N.bin files on >> ath...@lists.infradead.org . >> >> The new positions for firmware files were not revealed but I found a couple >> of >> places [2,3,4,5] in my search. > > Yeah, the ath1?k-firmware.git repos are being moved to > git.codelinaro.org and we will send an announcement once everything is > ready. > >> And to the request to get the latest versions released via >> linux-firmware.git >> (or maybe even only in Kalle's repositories), I got (some weeks ago) the >> answer "Let me check with our team.". >> >> It is rather hard to make statements about Qualcomm - simply because it is >> not just a single person and I have no idea about the internal structures. >> But >> it doesn't seem to be the highest priority (for the "internal team"?) to >> make >> fixes available for everyone. I still hope that it is just delayed due to >> some >> unfortunate circumstances. But this is just the current state. > > Thanks for letting me know, I was not aware any of this. Me and Jeff > will investigate and get back to you. In case not everyone noticed but Jeff has now uploaded updates to 2.5.0.1 branch: https://git.codelinaro.org/clo/ath-firmware/ath11k-firmware/-/commit/97e0d33fe3e0f708459a682b167014906719337d https://git.codelinaro.org/clo/ath-firmware/ath11k-firmware/-/commit/04dd351414737ac14b3e381d3695b59f4de67eaa https://git.codelinaro.org/clo/ath-firmware/ath11k-firmware/-/commit/2dda8ce67f65af54f86fb2f49316174841fa95f7 It's quite strange that they updated 2.5.0.1 branch first but my understanding that there should be updates for the newer 2.7.0.1 branch as well (2.7.0.1 branch is also in linux-firmware). -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: Question to recent Qualcomm CVEs
+ ath11k, jeff Sven Eckelmann writes: > On Monday, 26 February 2024 15:50:44 CET Felix Fietkau wrote: > [...] >>> The Qualcomm bulletin[1] says "Patches are being actively >> > shared with OEMs". >> > >> > Were these bugfixes made available for OpenWRT? Is there an established >> > procedure for such cases, where closed-source firmware gets bugfixes? > [...] >> > [1] >> > https://docs.qualcomm.com/product/publicresources/securitybulletin/ > december-2023-bulletin.html >> >> The fixes were not shared with OpenWrt. Qualcomm does not care about >> OpenWrt support for their platforms. > > I've asked (using their qualcomm-cdmatech-support portal) for an official > release of their WiFi firmware with all gathered bugfixes via > linux-firmware.git. I got statements that the ath10k firmware is no longer > supported + ath11k firmware is not developed further. But for some of them it > is possible to request a release of the firmwares via Kalle's repositories. > But also that Kalle's repositories are now replaced. Which seems to be > confirmed by Kalle's statement [1] regarding the firmware-N.bin files on > ath...@lists.infradead.org . > > The new positions for firmware files were not revealed but I found a couple > of > places [2,3,4,5] in my search. Yeah, the ath1?k-firmware.git repos are being moved to git.codelinaro.org and we will send an announcement once everything is ready. > And to the request to get the latest versions released via linux-firmware.git > (or maybe even only in Kalle's repositories), I got (some weeks ago) the > answer "Let me check with our team.". > > It is rather hard to make statements about Qualcomm - simply because it is > not just a single person and I have no idea about the internal structures. > But > it doesn't seem to be the highest priority (for the "internal team"?) to make > fixes available for everyone. I still hope that it is just delayed due to > some > unfortunate circumstances. But this is just the current state. Thanks for letting me know, I was not aware any of this. Me and Jeff will investigate and get back to you. For others, here's a link to the thread in openwrt-devel: https://lists.openwrt.org/pipermail/openwrt-devel/2024-February/042341.html -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: Question to recent Qualcomm CVEs
On Monday, 26 February 2024 15:50:44 CET Felix Fietkau wrote: [...] >> The Qualcomm bulletin[1] says "Patches are being actively > > shared with OEMs". > > > > Were these bugfixes made available for OpenWRT? Is there an established > > procedure for such cases, where closed-source firmware gets bugfixes? [...] > > [1] > > https://docs.qualcomm.com/product/publicresources/securitybulletin/ december-2023-bulletin.html > > The fixes were not shared with OpenWrt. Qualcomm does not care about > OpenWrt support for their platforms. I've asked (using their qualcomm-cdmatech-support portal) for an official release of their WiFi firmware with all gathered bugfixes via linux-firmware.git. I got statements that the ath10k firmware is no longer supported + ath11k firmware is not developed further. But for some of them it is possible to request a release of the firmwares via Kalle's repositories. But also that Kalle's repositories are now replaced. Which seems to be confirmed by Kalle's statement [1] regarding the firmware-N.bin files on ath...@lists.infradead.org . The new positions for firmware files were not revealed but I found a couple of places [2,3,4,5] in my search. And to the request to get the latest versions released via linux-firmware.git (or maybe even only in Kalle's repositories), I got (some weeks ago) the answer "Let me check with our team.". It is rather hard to make statements about Qualcomm - simply because it is not just a single person and I have no idea about the internal structures. But it doesn't seem to be the highest priority (for the "internal team"?) to make fixes available for everyone. I still hope that it is just delayed due to some unfortunate circumstances. But this is just the current state. Kind regards, Sven [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/87bk8inesm@kernel.org [2] https://git.codelinaro.org/clo/ath-firmware/ath10k-firmware [3] https://git.codelinaro.org/clo/ath-firmware/ath11k-firmware [4] https://git.codelinaro.org/clo/ath-firmware/ath12k-firmware [5] https://github.com/quic/upstream-wifi-fw signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: Question to recent Qualcomm CVEs
On 26.02.24 11:45, Tanjeff Moos wrote: Hi all, Qualcomm has bugs in the closed-source firmware for their WLAN and LTE hardware. The Qualcomm bulletin[1] says "Patches are being actively shared with OEMs". Were these bugfixes made available for OpenWRT? Is there an established procedure for such cases, where closed-source firmware gets bugfixes? Kind regards, Tanjeff [1] https://docs.qualcomm.com/product/publicresources/securitybulletin/december-2023-bulletin.html The fixes were not shared with OpenWrt. Qualcomm does not care about OpenWrt support for their platforms. - Felix ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
