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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20080912214351.GA5126@1wt.eu>
Date:	Fri, 12 Sep 2008 23:43:51 +0200
From:	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl>, david@...g.hm,
	Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.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 Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 04:59:36PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Willy Tarreau wrote:
> >Exactly. To give you an idea, I have a lot of servers running on a
> >"firmware" which consists in two parts :
> >  - a bzImage containing an initramfs with modules and a few scripts
> >  - an initrd which is in fact the rootfs
> >
> >When the kernel boots, it mounts the initrd, does a pivot_root and mounts
> >its modules into /boot/$(uname -r). All my kernels run modules from /boot
> >and not from /lib/modules, because it makes them more convenient to add
> >and remove. So /lib/modules is just a symlink to /boot.
> >
> >The above process is very convenient, as it is compatible with a lot of
> >boot methods : hard disk, CDROM, USB stick, PXE, etc...
> >
> >And moreover, I can have multiple kernels with only one rootfs (SMP, etc).
> >Introducing firmware there would mean a major thinking and rework of the
> >build (and possibly boot) process. The least invasive would probably be
> >to stuff them next to the modules in $(uname -r)/firmware, but even then,
> >it will take a lot of time to switch to a new system.
> >
> >And judging from what I see around, I'm far from being the only one not
> >using mkinitrd.
> 
> 
> FWIW, due to both lack of time and lack of (apparent) interest, I didn't 
> bother moving forward with the compile-firmware-into-module, even though 

This is what I was assuming, but thanks for clarifying this, Jeff.

> I still think it would be useful to add [back].

So do I. I think it will be easier to find time and work efficiently on
the subject when directly facing an issue.

Regards,
Willy

--
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/