linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH][RFC] request_firmware examples and MODULE

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]

Message-Id: <508B6A67-CA5B-4A81-B868-BF8A03D78888@vhugo.net>
Date:	Tue, 5 Sep 2006 11:26:06 -0700
From:	Victor Hugo <victor@...go.net>
To:	Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Victor Castro <victorhugo83@...oo.com>,
	Jon Masters <jonathan@...masters.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] request_firmware examples and MODULE_FIRMWARE

Hi Marcel,

On Sep 5, 2006, at 12:33 AM, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
>
> actually it has never been really a filename. It was a simple pattern
> that the initial hotplug script and later the udev script mapped  
> 1:1 to
> a filename on your filesystem. If you check the mailing list  
> archives of
> LKML and linux-hotplug you will see that I always resisted in allowing
> drivers to include a directory path in that call. A couple of people
> tried this and it is not what it was meant to be.
>
> The MODULE_FIRMWARE approach simply makes this pattern visible via
> modinfo, because otherwise you would have to scan the source code to
> find this pattern. And to make it use you have to apply the same  
> policy
> the firmware script is applying when choosing the file. Currently this
> is a 1:1 mapping.
>
> Regards
>
> Marcel

You're right, I should have been more specific when I said  
"filename", I really meant a 1:1 mapping to a file in /lib/firmware.

My question is, should we have a generic 1:1 mapping and make it  
visible through MODULE_FIRMWARE.

  Or like Jon Masters suggested have specific version numbers in the  
pattern and have them map to specific versions in /lib/firmware and  
make them all visible through MODULE_FIRMWARE.  I believe the  
reasoning behind this was to make packaging drivers easier.

I believe that we should have a generic mapping in the driver (i.e,  
"firmware.bin") and let the admin or the userspace hotplug scripts  
take care of filename policy with a link to the correct firmware  
version.

example :

firmware.bin -> firmware-xyz.bin

The main reason for not including speciic mapping in the driver is  
that everytime a new firmware version is released the driver has to  
be updated and recompiled.  Its much easier to change a hotplug script.

-Victor
-
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/