linux-kernel - Re: [bug?] tg3: Failed to load firmware "tigon/tg3

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: <486D5D4F.9060000@garzik.org>
Date:	Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:14:23 -0400
From:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
CC:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	mchan@...adcom.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [bug?] tg3: Failed to load firmware "tigon/tg3_tso.bin"

Alan Cox wrote:
>> Further, all current kernel build and test etc. scripts are unaware of 
>> 'make firmware_install', and it is unfair to everybody to force a 
>> flag-day build process change on people, just to keep their drivers in 
>> the same working state today as it was yesterday.
> 
> IMHO we want firmware built in as the default for the moment. If the
> firmware model makes sense (as I think it does) then the distributions
> will catch up, turn it on and sort out the default behaviour - exactly as
> they did all those years ago with modules, more recently with "use an
> initrd" and so on.

Agreed.


>> as "making no sense".  All these are real world examples where users 
>> FOLLOWING THEIR NORMAL, PROSCRIBED KERNEL PROCESSES will produce 
> 
> I hope you mean "prescribed" ;)

heh, *cough* yes


>> The only valid assumption here is to assume that the user is /unaware/ 
>> of these new steps they must take in order to continue to have a working 
>> system.
> 
> To a large extent not the user but their distro - consider "make install"

Actually, I was tossing that about in my head:

Is it a better idea to eliminate 'make firmware_install' completely, and 
instead implement it silently via 'make install'?

'make install' is already a big fat distro hook...

	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/