linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] ASoC: qcom: q6apm: add support for reading firmware name from DT

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]

Date:   Wed, 28 Jun 2023 23:00:54 +0300
From:   Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, andersson@...nel.org,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, johan+linaro@...nel.org,
        perex@...ex.cz, tiwai@...e.com, lgirdwood@...il.com,
        ckeepax@...nsource.cirrus.com, kuninori.morimoto.gx@...esas.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com,
        alsa-devel@...a-project.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] ASoC: qcom: q6apm: add support for reading firmware
 name from DT

On Wed, 28 Jun 2023 at 22:40, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 10:33:16PM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > On 28/06/2023 21:10, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > If the goal here is to put all the firmwares for a given board in a
> > > single place surely it would be better to factor this all out of the
> > > individual drivers so that they ask some helper for a directory to use
> > > for firmware?  Adding these device specific firmware node properties
> > > doesn't seem to follow.
>
> > This quickly becomes overcomplicated. Some platforms use different firmware
> > naming structure. Some firmware goes into a generic location and other files
> > go into device-specific location. So having a generic helper doesn't really
> > help.
>
> That sounds like a job for symlinks surely?

Excuse me, but I don't understand the goal for such symlinks. In my
opinion (and more importantly, in the opinion of qcom maintainers),
firmware-name does the necessary job. It provides enough flexibility
and doesn't require any additional dances around.



-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry