linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] firmware: Allow release-specific firmware dir

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: <20080911201541.GA18518@kroah.com>
Date:	Thu, 11 Sep 2008 13:15:41 -0700
From:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To:	Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>
Cc:	Thierry Vignaud <tvignaud@...driva.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, dwmw2@...radead.org,
	jeffm@...e.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: Allow release-specific firmware dir

On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 06:39:25PM +0200, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> > > > > This isn't compatible with the version of udev that people actually have
> > > > > installed, today. And it's also the _wrong_ thing to do.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Firmware really _isn't_ version-specific.
> > > > 
> > > > Tell that to every Debian and Debian derived system on the planet.
> > > > 
> > > > To my knowledge, it is only fedora and possibly one or two other dists
> > > > that put the firmware files in a unary /lib/firmware location, rather
> > > > than a versioned /lib/firmware/$KERNELRELASE one.
> > > 
> > > We (Mandriva Linux) do too.
> > > Why other distro cannot package firmware separatly for all their kernel
> > > flavors?
> > > 
> > > Firmware are not version-specific.
> > 
> > Yes it is, when it is bundled with the kernel source tree itself.
> > 
> > Why do people not realize this?
> > 
> > This is a real problem for distros, and for anyone who wants to have
> > multiple kernel versions on a single machine.  Jeff's patch fixes this.
> 
> once you move the firmware into its own package built from a separate
> source tree (and not the kernel) this is no longer a problem.

Agreed, but that's not what is going on here at all.

This is the firmware that is in the kernel source tree, that has been
moved to use request_firmware, and was originally tied tightly to the
kernel drivers themselves.

Now I can't install multiple kernel versions of a rpm package on my
machine at once.  Or even a single rpm package and then my own build,
without stomping on files owned by a different package.

That's unacceptable and can not work and is why Jeff made this patch.

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/