[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200608292104.24645.mb@bu3sch.de>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 21:04:24 +0200
From: Michael Buesch <mb@...sch.de>
To: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc: Oleg Verych <olecom@...wer.upol.cz>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...eleye.com>,
Sven Luther <sven.luther@...adoo.fr>,
debian-kernel@...ts.debian.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
David Lang <dlang@...italinsight.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MODULE_FIRMWARE for binary firmware(s)
On Tuesday 29 August 2006 20:32, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 08:46:45AM -0700, David Lang wrote:
> > On Mon, 28 Aug 2006, Greg KH wrote:
> >
> > >I think the current way we handle firmware works quite well, especially
> > >given the wide range of different devices that it works for (everything
> > >from BIOS upgrades to different wireless driver stages).
> >
> > the current system works for many people yes, but not everyone.
> >
> > I'm still waiting to find a way to get the iw2200 working without having to
> > use modules.
>
> Sounds like a bug you need to pester the iw2200 developers about then.
> I don't think it has much to do with the firmware subsystem though :)
Well, yes and no.
The ipw needs the firmware on insmod time (in contrast to bcm43xx
for example, which needs it on ifconfig up time).
So ipw needs to call request_firmware at insmod time. In case of
built-in, that is when the initcall happens. No userland is available
and request_firmware can not call the userspace helpers to upload
the firmware to sysfs.
Well, not really easy to find a sane solution for this. :)
--
Greetings Michael.
-
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