Re: [Ksummit-2008-discuss] RFC: Moving firmware blobs out of the kernel.

From: Takashi Iwai
Date: Fri May 30 2008 - 05:52:57 EST


At Thu, 29 May 2008 14:57:38 -0700,
Yinghai Lu wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 2:31 PM, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > From: "Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 13:55:16 -0700
> >
> >> driver should check fw version...
> >
> > This alone is not a reason to rip the firmware out into a seperate
> > tree. And I am absolutely not convinced that the cases where this
> > matters all universally even use firmware versions.
> >
> > I've installed the wrong ipw2200 on several occaisions.
> >
> > Furthermore, it's about distributing what works with what it's meant
> > to work with. With this seperate scheme, I can still link in the
> > wrong firmware file (the driver doesn't check the firmware version
> > until it executes) and the driver won't work. So this moves the
> > validation to run time, which users typically don't appreciate.
>
> I agree. I hate to have two klibc (one for 32 bit, and one for 64bit)
> to for initramfs to load FW for qlogic...
>
> dwmw2 's new patches to put all fw in /firmware, and built them into
> kernel could avoid that...
>
> and could make the build process to check fw version to match with
> driver in different kernel version later...

OTOH, it doesn't give you any error at build time even if you forget
to put a firmware image beforehand. The kernel continues to look for
a non-existing external firmware file. In the old code, this can't
happen.

It's just a small drawback, and I still like the idea very well,
though.


Takashi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/