linux-kernel - Re: Firmware versioning best practices: ath3k-2.fw rename or replace ath3k-1.fw ?

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: <1286964370.3316.6.camel@aeonflux>
Date:	Wed, 13 Oct 2010 13:06:10 +0300
From:	Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>
To:	Henry Ptasinski <henryp@...adcom.com>
Cc:	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <lrodriguez@...eros.com>,
	Suraj Sumangala <Suraj.Sumangala@...eros.com>,
	Luis Rodriguez <Luis.Rodriguez@...eros.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	linux-bluetooth <linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Firmware versioning best practices: ath3k-2.fw rename or
 replace ath3k-1.fw ?

Hi Henry,

> > > Marcel had answered me before. It makes sense to have same file name.
> > > Other ways we end up changing the driver whenever there is a firmware 
> > > change.
> > 
> > > > I last tried to document a thread we had over this here:
> > > >
> > > > http://wireless.kernel.org/en/developers/Documentation/firmware-versioning
> > > >
> > 
> > Thanks, I've updated that link above to document bug fixing does not require
> > a filename change.
> 
> I don't really understand why you would not want to change the code revision
> part of the filename.  
> 
> I totally agree that you don't want to change the driver every time the
> firmware gets a bug fix, but wasn't that the whole point of splitting the name
> into API and code revisions portions, and symlinking the file to one that just
> has the API version?
> 
> What's the issue with using the process as originally documented?

as I stated before, for Bluetooth this makes no sense. You don't need
API version numbers since the API is a STANDARD. It is called HCI. So
please don't use API version numbers in the firmware files.

I will reject firmware file versions for upstream drivers.

Regards

Marcel


--
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/