Re: [PULL] ath11k firmware 20211223

[Jouni Malinen <j@w1.fi>]

On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 08:04:26AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 12:50 PM Jouni Malinen <j@w1.fi> wrote:
> > Would the following in WHENCE work for you?
> >
> > Driver: ath11k - Qualcomm Technologies 802.11ax chipset support
> >
> > File: ath11k/IPQ6018/hw1.0/board-2.bin
> > ...
> > Version: WLAN.HK.2.1.0.1-01238-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-2
> > Notice: ath11k/IPQ6018/hw1.0/Notice.txt
> 
> We'd have to teach copy-firmware.sh what to do with a "Notice:" key.
> Is there a reason "File:" wouldn't work?  The intention is to install
> the notices alongside the binaries, so that would accomplish it.

Yeah, that sounds reasonable to me. From copying/installing/distribution
view point, these can really be handled in the exact same way as the
actual firmware binaries in practice.

> > In other words, there would be only a single "License:" line and one
> > "Notice:" line for each firmware version? The license itself (i.e.,
> > LICENSE.QualcommAtheros_ath10k) is same for all the versions while the
> > set of notices (i.e., those notice.txt files) can be different based on
> > what is included in the particular build.
> 
> Yes, that would help.  Would you be able to adjust the existing
> entries for ath firmware in the same way?

Yes, I'll work with Kalle to update the existing ath* WLAN cases.

> > > > I'm still working on your other comment about notice.txt, will get back
> > > > on that later.
> >
> > This part about clearly identifying the files should be clear now, but
> > it would be good to resolve that part about the notice.txt files in
> > general before sending out an updated pull request.
> 
> Given these were merged in the past, perhaps I'm being overly
> pedantic.  If we can mark them as Files or Notices instead of
> Licenses, I won't hold it up.  It leaves me slightly confused why
> attribution files need to reference agreements with Qualcomm, splatter
> Confidential and Proprietary throughout the file, and reference
> COPYING and README in reference to GPLv2 when the BSD license was
> clearly chosen.  Perhaps that could be cleaned up in the future.

Thanks. We'll remove most of the unnecessary information from the new
notice.txt files and that should get rid of many of the potentially
confusing parts. If that cleanup leaves something confusing in place,
we are open to cleaning these up further in followup patches, but it
would be nice to be able to get the updated versions into
linux-firmware.git without much more additional delay and yes, this
would be with the File: instead of Licence: entries for the notice.txt
files.

-- 
Jouni Malinen                                            PGP id EFC895FA

-- 
ath11k mailing list
ath11k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath11k