lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 15 Jul 2008 03:57:16 -0400
From:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	david@...g.hm, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT *] Allow request_firmware() to be satisfied from in-kernel,
 use it in more drivers.

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008, david@...g.hm wrote:
>> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>> That's a totally bogus argument.
>> you misunderstood me. the people pushing request_firmware() are doing so on
>> the basis that they won't have to use kernel ram to hold the firmware. the
>> people pushing for having the option of building the firmware into the module
>> are acknowleding that this may use a little more ram, but they see it as being
>> more reliable.
> 
> I'm just saying that it's a totally bogus argument to claim that it takes 
> less memory - Either way.

Agreed.


> As to reliability, I don't buy that, especially with a generic interface, 
> and with a way to link the thing in-kernel anyway. Using common 
> infrastructure is going to be more reliable.

A more complex, multi-file inter-dependent system is more reliable than 
a single-file driver with built-in firmware, doing the same thing?

Come _on_.

There are good arguments for request_firmware(), but that ain't it.


> The argument for request_firmware() is that it's a good _single_ interface 
> to the whole firmware issue, allowing us to split up the driver from the 
> firmware without every driver having to do some hack of its own.

Agreed.

	Jeff


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ