linux-kernel - Re: [GIT *] Allow request_firmware() to be satisfied from in-kernel, use it in more drivers.

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: <20080715090441.478c2287@infradead.org>
Date:	Tue, 15 Jul 2008 09:04:41 -0700
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To:	Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, jeff@...zik.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, dwmw2@...radead.org,
	alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT *] Allow request_firmware() to be satisfied from
 in-kernel, use it in more drivers.

On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:57:09 +0200
Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl> wrote:

> Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 Jul 2008, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >> IMO the newly added /inability/ to build firmware into kernel
> >> modules is a clear regression.
> > 
> > IMO you're being stupid.
> > 
> > How about explainign why it makes any difference what-so-ever?
> > 
> > If you can load the module, you can load the firmware. Claiming
> > anything else is just _stupid_.
> 
> Sure, in theory it's that simple. Here's a concrete example that
> shows how things are harder in practice.
> 
> I use the 'make deb-pkg' target (from scripts/package) to build my
> Debian kernel packages from git. So that needs to be adapted to
> include /lib/firmware. No real problem so far.
> 
> So then I build 2.6.27-rc1 and install it. Great.
> 
> You release 2.6.27-rc2 and I build it. Ouch! It fails to install, at
> least if I want to install it _alongside_ 2.6.27-rc1 or other kernels
> (which I do!). Why does it fail? Because dpkg's package management
> does not allow one package to overwrite files already "owned" by
> another package.
> 

question: how do you deal with this with the dozens of drivers that use
request_firmware() even before yesterday ?
the answer is critical in how to deal with this "new" situation as
well ;-)
--
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/