[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <15c47e4d-e70d-26bb-9747-0ad0aa81597b@broadcom.com>
Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 09:36:02 -0700
From: Scott Branden <scott.branden@...adcom.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
Andy Gross <andy.gross@...aro.org>,
David Brown <david.brown@...aro.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
BCM Kernel Feedback <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] firmware: add offset to request_firmware_into_buf
Hi Greg,
On 2019-05-22 10:52 p.m., Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 07:51:12PM -0700, Scott Branden wrote:
>> Add offset to request_firmware_into_buf to allow for portions
>> of firmware file to be read into a buffer. Necessary where firmware
>> needs to be loaded in portions from file in memory constrained systems.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Scott Branden <scott.branden@...adcom.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/base/firmware_loader/firmware.h | 5 +++
>> drivers/base/firmware_loader/main.c | 49 +++++++++++++++++--------
>> include/linux/firmware.h | 8 +++-
>> 3 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> No new firmware test for this new option? How do we know it even works?
I was unaware there are existing firmware tests. Please let me know
where these tests exists and I can add a test for this new option.
We have tested this with a new driver in development which requires the
firmware file to be read in portions into memory. I can add my
tested-by and others to the commit message if desired.
> :)
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
Regards,
Scott
Powered by blists - more mailing lists