[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0807151549400.16109@asgard.lang.hm>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:50:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: david@...g.hm
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl>, jeff@...zik.org,
arjan@...radead.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.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, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-07-15 at 15:24 -0700, david@...g.hm wrote:
>>
>>> Why is it suddenly so important that a kernel be 'zero impact' for that
>>> module case, when it's never been zero impact for that case before? You
>>> had to rewrite the initrd to begin with, but now you're not willing to do
>>> it again, just because you have to rewrite it slightly _differently_?
>>
>> becouse the tools that wrote the initrd already put the modules in. I
>> don't maintain those tools, they came with the distro. we're just asking
>> to not require those tools to be updated immediatly.
>
> The tools that write the initrd already put the firmware in too.
not always, as Jeff showed.
David Lang
--
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