The restart message is supposed to be HIDPP_REPORT_ID_LONG according to
the specs, but it works just as well if we use
HIDPP_REPORT_ID_SHORT. We better stick to the specs, though.
Quite a few plugins are using a FuDeviceLocker to detach then attach in
the error path, and finding them isn't easy as we explicitly cast to a
FuDeviceLockerFunc.
For sanity, just provide both symbols so we can do the right thing in
both cases. It seems like a sensible thing to allow.
Fixes https://github.com/fwupd/fwupd/issues/3771
It's actually quite hard to build a front-end for fwupd at the moment
as you're never sure when the progress bar is going to zip back to 0%
and start all over again. Some plugins go 0..100% for write, others
go 0..100% for erase, then again for write, then *again* for verify.
By creating a helper object we can easily split up the progress of the
specific task, e.g. write_firmware().
We can encode at the plugin level "the erase takes 50% of the time, the
write takes 40% and the read takes 10%". This means we can have a
progressbar which goes up just once at a consistent speed.
Logitech only provided one peripheral update for unifying hardware as a
PoC and now we are supporting other receivers this does not make a lot
of sense. All the new Bolt peripherals will need quirks anyway.
There are now multiple plugins using drm_dp_aux_dev interface which
may potentially be combined with an amdgpu. Prevent exercising this
interface with any plugin using DP aux unless a new enough kernel is
installed.
Before this change calling FuUsbDevice->open() opened the device, and
also unconditionally added various GUIDs and InstanceIDs which we
normally do in setup.
Then fu_device_setup() would call the FuSubclass->setup() vfunc which
would have no way of either opting out of the FuUsbDevice->setup()-like
behaviour, or controlling if the parent class ->setup is run before or
after the subclass setup.
Split up FuUsbDevice->open() into clear ->open() and ->setup() phases
and add the parent class calls where appropriate.
This means that ->setup() now behaves the same as all the other vfuncs.
There is a lot of code in fwupd that just assigns a shared object type to
a FuPlugin, and then for each device on that plugin assigns that same shared
object to each FuDevice.
Rather than proxy several kinds of information stores over two different levels
of abstraction create a 'context' which contains the shared *system* state
between the daemon, the plugins and the daemon.
This will allow us to hold other per-machine state in the future, for instance
the system battery level or AC state.
This allows us to 'nest' firmware formats, and removes a ton of duplication.
The aim here is to deprecate FuFirmwareImage -- it's almost always acting
as a 'child' FuFirmware instance, and even copies most of the vfuncs to allow
custom types. If I'm struggling to work out what should be a FuFirmware and
what should be a FuFirmwareImage then a plugin author has no hope.
For simple payloads we were adding bytes into an image and then the image into
a firmware. This gets really messy when most plugins are treating the FuFirmware
*as* the binary firmware file.
The GBytes saved in the FuFirmware would be considered the payload with the
aim of not using FuFirmwareImage in the single-image case.
