[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140621105205.GA31611@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 12:52:05 +0200
From: Francois Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...e.com>
Cc: cocci@...teme.lip6.fr, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: SmPL for automatic request_firmware_nowait() conversion
Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@...e.com> :
> I was just porting over an ethernet driver [0] to use request_firmware_nowait()
> since firmware loading seems can take over a minute on one device, while
> at it I noticed no other ethernet drivers yet use this API so figure
> this may be a trend coming if devices are getting as complex as cxgb4.
> The cxgb4 driver happens to even use the firmware API 3 times!
There should be no problem for the firmware requests issued through
ethtool in cxgb4.
[...]
> netdev: how worthy is this effort?
Biased comment below :o)
I'm wondering the benefit of automatic API changes when it could be argued
that the symptoms call for driver dependant code rework.
The 60 seconds delay is kind of a pavlovian signal: one can bet that the
driver includes a request_firmware in its probe method. So does cxgb4.
I still believe in the old school "request firmware from net_device_ops.open".
I've been happy with it since f1e02ed109df5f99abf942b8ccc99960cb09dd38.
This kind of rework may not be trivial for cxgb4. Please get code tested on
real hardware (modular/monolithic build, with/without firmware, etc.) as I
won't argue against your crusade for cxgb4.
Asynchronous firmware loading provides a rather nice high level API but
it's imho not the essence of network devices firmware loading problems.
--
Ueimor
--
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