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: <20080705020124.ac73e979.billfink@mindspring.com>
Date:	Sat, 5 Jul 2008 02:01:24 -0400
From:	Bill Fink <billfink@...dspring.com>
To:	Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br>
Cc:	Trent Piepho <tpiepho@...escale.com>,
	Olivier Galibert <galibert@...ox.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, hugh@...itas.com,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, 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"

On Sat, 5 Jul 2008, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:

> On Fri, 04 Jul 2008, Trent Piepho wrote:
> > On Fri, 4 Jul 2008, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > > On Sat, 05 Jul 2008, Olivier Galibert wrote:
> > >> Won't that break multiple kernel installs on any binary packaging
> > >> system that cares about file collisions?  Multiple kernel rpms
> > >> providing the same /lib/firmware files would break things wouldn't
> > >> they ?
> > >
> > > We will probably need per-kernel directories, exactly like what is done for
> > > modules.  And since there are (now) both kernel-version-specific, and
> > > non-kernel-version-specific firmware, this means the firmware loader should
> > > look first on the version-specific directory (say, /lib/firmware/$(uname
> > > -r)/), then if not found, on the general directory (/lib/firmware).
> > 
> > How about /lib/modules/`uname -r`/firmware
> 
> I am fine with it, it certainly has a few advantages.

Why not put it in the same /lib/modules directory as the foo.ko
kernel module itself?  Then those who like to scp kernel modules
around (which I've done myself on occasion) just need to learn
to scp foo.* instead of foo.ko.  Why replicate a separate
/lib/modules/`uname -r`/firmware directory?

						-Bill
--
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/