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]

Date:	Wed, 16 Jul 2008 02:55:32 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Sven-Haegar Koch <haegar@...net.de>
To:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
cc:	Linux-Kernel-Mailinglist <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 17:39 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > 
> > 'make modules_install && make install' will
> >         * install modules in /lib
> >         * install firmware in /lib      [2.6.27 only]
> >         * install kernel
> >         * update grub
> >         * rebuild initrd
> > 
> > Do this, under both 2.6.26 and 2.6.27.
> > 
> > 2.6.26 will put a working driver into initrd.
> > 
> > 2.6.27 will put a dead driver into initrd (because no firmware got 
> > copied into initrd image).
> 
> I believe your claim is untrue. It uses the distribution's tool to
> create the initrd, doesn't it? And those tools _do_ handle the
> MODULE_FIRMWARE() tags and pull in appropriate firmware. They've had to
> get that right for _years_ already.

Something from the non-development world:

At least the initramfs-tools (which contains mkinitrd) of Debian Etch do 
not do this (the current testing/development version Lenny does) - no 
firmware support in the initrd at all - and not needed for booting until 
now.
(It has /lib/firmware support after the initrd for the not-so-important
stuff like usb/sound/video/wireless)

Yes, it may be nearly ancient by now, but for servers it contains all we 
need, and most certainly would not want to use something that changes and 
needs checking/hand-fixing every month - I expect this version to be still 
in use a year from now, then just gradually being updated to the next 
debian version.

Currently we use 2.6.24, and I expect to use some newer kernel to support 
newer replacement hardware before all installs are upgraded. So having the 
firmware-inside-module support would be a help for us when modules are 
starting to be needed for disk or network access, keeping from the need to 
try backporting huge initrd/make-kpkg changes.

c'ya
sven

-- 

The Internet treats censorship as a routing problem, and routes around
it. (John Gilmore on http://www.cygnus.com/~gnu/)
--
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/