From: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org (Greg KH)
To: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
Subject: [Cocci] [PATCH 0/3] drivers: expand usage of request_firmware_direct()
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 15:25:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140708222536.GA7745@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <s5hmwczve4i.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 06:18:05PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> At Tue, 24 Jun 2014 15:39:40 -0700,
> Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> >
> > From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@suse.com>
> >
> > Takashi added request_firmware_direct() via bba3a87e9 through v3.14-rc1
> > which avoids the unnecessary delay introduced by using the udev firmware
> > loader in case the first try failed when loading we know loading "firmware"
> > is optional. The first use case was for microcode update but if drivers are
> > using it for optional configuration updates, custom EEPROMs, and other
> > junk other than firmware that should apply as well as good use cases,
> > specially if the driver already had a first phase in which it loaded
> > the first required firmware. While reviewing one driver I figured it'd
> > be best to try to give formalizing a check with SmPL. This isn't perfect
> > it had 1 false possitive drivers/fmc/fmc-fakedev.c on the entire kernel
> > run but my hope is this can be extended a bit more to build more
> > confidence, and then perhaps stuff it as a coccicheck.
> >
> > I suppose this will not be required once and if we remove
> > CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER. Is that ever going away for good? I know
> > there was a recent attempt to remove the udev loader support but
> > it was unclear if the special alternative helper support would be
> > removed upstream from the kernel.
>
> Actually a few weeks ago I sent a patch to make request_firmware()
> with usermode helper explicitly to be used by some drivers (like
> dell-rbu). I hope Greg took it for 3.17. Once when this patch is in,
> distros can turn off the usermode helper fallback gracefully, so no
> ugly timeout issue shouldn't happen.
That patch is now merged, so this series should not be needed anymore,
right?
thanks,
greg k-h
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@do-not-panic.com>,
chunkeey@googlemail.com, leedom@chelsio.com,
cocci@systeme.lip6.fr, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] drivers: expand usage of request_firmware_direct()
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 15:25:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140708222536.GA7745@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <s5hmwczve4i.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 06:18:05PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> At Tue, 24 Jun 2014 15:39:40 -0700,
> Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> >
> > From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@suse.com>
> >
> > Takashi added request_firmware_direct() via bba3a87e9 through v3.14-rc1
> > which avoids the unnecessary delay introduced by using the udev firmware
> > loader in case the first try failed when loading we know loading "firmware"
> > is optional. The first use case was for microcode update but if drivers are
> > using it for optional configuration updates, custom EEPROMs, and other
> > junk other than firmware that should apply as well as good use cases,
> > specially if the driver already had a first phase in which it loaded
> > the first required firmware. While reviewing one driver I figured it'd
> > be best to try to give formalizing a check with SmPL. This isn't perfect
> > it had 1 false possitive drivers/fmc/fmc-fakedev.c on the entire kernel
> > run but my hope is this can be extended a bit more to build more
> > confidence, and then perhaps stuff it as a coccicheck.
> >
> > I suppose this will not be required once and if we remove
> > CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER. Is that ever going away for good? I know
> > there was a recent attempt to remove the udev loader support but
> > it was unclear if the special alternative helper support would be
> > removed upstream from the kernel.
>
> Actually a few weeks ago I sent a patch to make request_firmware()
> with usermode helper explicitly to be used by some drivers (like
> dell-rbu). I hope Greg took it for 3.17. Once when this patch is in,
> distros can turn off the usermode helper fallback gracefully, so no
> ugly timeout issue shouldn't happen.
That patch is now merged, so this series should not be needed anymore,
right?
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-08 22:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-24 22:39 [Cocci] [PATCH 0/3] drivers: expand usage of request_firmware_direct() Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-06-24 22:39 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-06-24 22:39 ` [Cocci] [PATCH 1/3] mmc: vub300: use request_firmware_direct() for pseudo code Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-06-24 22:39 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-06-24 22:39 ` [Cocci] [PATCH 2/3] cxgb4: make configuration load use request_firmware_direct() Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-06-24 22:39 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-06-24 22:54 ` [Cocci] " Casey Leedom
2014-06-24 22:54 ` Casey Leedom
2014-06-25 1:50 ` [Cocci] " Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-06-25 1:50 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-06-25 17:12 ` [Cocci] " Casey Leedom
2014-06-25 17:12 ` Casey Leedom
2014-06-25 17:31 ` [Cocci] " Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-06-25 17:31 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-06-25 18:58 ` [Cocci] " Casey Leedom
2014-06-25 18:58 ` Casey Leedom
2014-06-25 20:05 ` [Cocci] " Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-06-25 20:05 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-06-24 22:39 ` [Cocci] [PATCH 3/3] p54: use request_firmware_direct() for optional EEPROM override Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-06-24 22:39 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-06-25 1:10 ` [Cocci] [RESEND][PATCH " Christian Lamparter
2014-06-25 1:10 ` Christian Lamparter
2014-06-25 7:26 ` [Cocci] [PATCH " Arend van Spriel
2014-06-25 7:26 ` Arend van Spriel
2014-06-25 8:06 ` [Cocci] " Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-06-25 8:06 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-06-26 16:18 ` [Cocci] [PATCH 0/3] drivers: expand usage of request_firmware_direct() Takashi Iwai
2014-06-26 16:18 ` Takashi Iwai
2014-06-26 19:21 ` [Cocci] " Greg KH
2014-06-26 19:21 ` Greg KH
2014-07-08 22:25 ` Greg KH [this message]
2014-07-08 22:25 ` Greg KH
2014-07-08 23:52 ` [Cocci] " Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-07-08 23:52 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-07-09 0:24 ` [Cocci] " Greg KH
2014-07-09 0:24 ` Greg KH
2014-07-09 0:46 ` [Cocci] " Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-07-09 0:46 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140708222536.GA7745@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=cocci@systeme.lip6.fr \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.