[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <86802c440805291457r71340133pc413b7f1e78e5df3@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 14:57:38 -0700
From: "Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
To: "David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: matthew@....cx, arjan@...ux.intel.com, greg@...ah.com,
James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com,
ksummit-2008-discuss@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
dwmw2@...radead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2008-discuss] RFC: Moving firmware blobs out of the kernel.
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 2:31 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: "Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 13:55:16 -0700
>
>> driver should check fw version...
>
> This alone is not a reason to rip the firmware out into a seperate
> tree. And I am absolutely not convinced that the cases where this
> matters all universally even use firmware versions.
>
> I've installed the wrong ipw2200 on several occaisions.
>
> Furthermore, it's about distributing what works with what it's meant
> to work with. With this seperate scheme, I can still link in the
> wrong firmware file (the driver doesn't check the firmware version
> until it executes) and the driver won't work. So this moves the
> validation to run time, which users typically don't appreciate.
I agree. I hate to have two klibc (one for 32 bit, and one for 64bit)
to for initramfs to load FW for qlogic...
dwmw2 's new patches to put all fw in /firmware, and built them into
kernel could avoid that...
and could make the build process to check fw version to match with
driver in different kernel version later...
YH
--
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