netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC v2 0/4] wifi: ath10k: support board-specific firmware overrides

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: <87v85wg39y.fsf@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2024 17:19:05 +0200
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
Cc: Jeff Johnson <quic_jjohnson@...cinc.com>,  "David S. Miller"
 <davem@...emloft.net>,  Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,  Jakub
 Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,  Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,  Rob Herring
 <robh+dt@...nel.org>,  Krzysztof Kozlowski
 <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,  Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
  Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,  Konrad Dybcio
 <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,  ath10k@...ts.infradead.org,
  linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,  netdev@...r.kernel.org,
  devicetree@...r.kernel.org,  linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,  Krzysztof
 Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 0/4] wifi: ath10k: support board-specific
 firmware overrides

Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org> writes:

>> To be on the safe side using 'qcom-rb1' makes sense but on the other
>> hand that means we need to update linux-firmware (basically add a new
>> symlink) everytime a new product is added. But are there going to be
>> that many new ath10k based products?
>>
>> Using 'qcm2290' is easier because for a new product then there only
>> needs to be a change in DTS and no need to change anything
>> linux-firmware. But here the risk is that if there's actually two
>> different ath10k firmware branches for 'qcm2290'. If that ever happens
>> (I hope not) I guess we could solve that by adding new 'qcm2290-foo'
>> directory?
>>
>> But I don't really know, thoughts?
>
> After some thought, I'd suggest to follow approach taken by the rest
> of qcom firmware:

Can you provide pointers to those cases?

> put a default (accepted by non-secured hardware) firmware to SoC dir
> and then put a vendor-specific firmware into subdir. If any of such
> vendors appear, we might even implement structural fallback: first
> look into sdm845/Google/blueline, then in sdm845/Google, sdm845/ and
> finally just under hw1.0.

Honestly that looks quite compilicated compared to having just one
sub-directory. How will ath10k find the directory names (or I vendor and
model names) like 'Google' or 'blueline' in this example?

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches