[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c630b349-3e2e-5a2e-56f9-aaef4893f28e@broadcom.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 22:42:43 +0200
From: Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com>
To: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@...-carit.de>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Daniel Wagner <wagi@...om.org>,
Bastien Nocera <hadess@...ess.net>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>,
Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
"linux-input@...r.kernel.org" <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC v0 7/8] Input: ims-pcu: use firmware_stat instead of
completion
On 03-08-16 17:35, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>> In my opinion the kernel should provide functionality to user-space and
>> > user-space providing functionality to the kernel should be avoided.
> Why? We have bunch of stuff running in userspace for the kernel. Fuse
> for example. I am sure there are more.
To me "running in user-space" is not the same as providing
functionality, but I see your point given below.
>> >
>>> > > If we solve waiting for rootfs (or something else that may contain
>>> > > firmware) then these cases will not need to use usermode helper.
>> >
>> > If firmware (or whatever) API could get notification of mount syscall it
>> > could be used to retry firmware loading instead of periodic polling.
>> > That leaves the question raised by you about when to stop trying. The
>> > initlevel stuff is probably a user-space only concept, right? So no
>> > ideas how the kernel itself could decide except for a "long" timeout.
> The kernel really does not know, it can only guess. The firmware may get
> delivered by motorized carrier pidgeons. But distribution does know how
> they set up, so they are in position to tell the kernel "go" or "give
> up".
What distro employs pidgeons. Like to give it a spin ;-)
Maybe the latest idea from Luis is a viable option.
Regards,
Arend
Powered by blists - more mailing lists