From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0C3BC433ED for ; Thu, 13 May 2021 06:09:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7F5761287 for ; Thu, 13 May 2021 06:09:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230225AbhEMGKk (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 May 2021 02:10:40 -0400 Received: from so254-9.mailgun.net ([198.61.254.9]:42632 "EHLO so254-9.mailgun.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230121AbhEMGKj (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 May 2021 02:10:39 -0400 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; v=1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mg.codeaurora.org; q=dns/txt; s=smtp; t=1620886170; h=Content-Type: MIME-Version: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Date: References: Subject: Cc: To: From: Sender; bh=DFG9qqEL80a90T6eOVH9GPe7NTWmMeB96ru+p2yxzCI=; b=HV4SCDnfH7bWwz0PXB/2JIPU0b3cvwdXb7spbOZvhi2CXTmW10fNGKj+isvF4cOn2MP6aVYd oPFtEtcJsvJyHU3arYBi2OGXDkj9sHp4ICZxXYQIU9/eljirt6JTIkYXgEV7Tzd/7uhCBtsj gXjFAVrr5pO7pWvFk9LtizDbFPk= X-Mailgun-Sending-Ip: 198.61.254.9 X-Mailgun-Sid: WyI3YTAwOSIsICJsaW51eC13aXJlbGVzc0B2Z2VyLmtlcm5lbC5vcmciLCAiYmU5ZTRhIl0= Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org (ec2-35-166-182-171.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.166.182.171]) by smtp-out-n06.prod.us-west-2.postgun.com with SMTP id 609cc281a4c86a394a491cc0 (version=TLS1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256); Thu, 13 May 2021 06:09:05 GMT Sender: kvalo=codeaurora.org@mg.codeaurora.org Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id C7DF7C4338A; Thu, 13 May 2021 06:09:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from potku.adurom.net (88-114-240-156.elisa-laajakaista.fi [88.114.240.156]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: kvalo) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AC824C433D3; Thu, 13 May 2021 06:09:02 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org AC824C433D3 Authentication-Results: aws-us-west-2-caf-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: aws-us-west-2-caf-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=kvalo@codeaurora.org From: Kalle Valo To: Brian Norris List-Id: Cc: Pkshih , "linux-firmware\@kernel.org" , "linux-wireless\@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: Request to update 8852a firmware of rtw89 to v0.13.8.0 References: <57e9f582340545c79a9ab3433e2a4a7d@realtek.com> <87cztx87tr.fsf@tynnyri.adurom.net> Date: Thu, 13 May 2021 09:09:00 +0300 In-Reply-To: (Brian Norris's message of "Tue, 11 May 2021 12:10:55 -0700") Message-ID: <87tun7i2rn.fsf@codeaurora.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Brian Norris writes: > On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:05 AM Kalle Valo wrote: >> >> Pkshih writes: >> >> > Please help to update 8852a firmware. >> > This is first time I send a pull request. If anything is wrong, >> > please let me know. >> >> rtw89 driver is not in upstream yet, and it has not been reviewed >> either. I recommend holding off pulling the firmware until the driver is >> reviewed. > > FWIW, preliminary rtw89 firmware was already merged. This is just an update. > > I also wonder, what's the harm? People like me are actively testing > the early versions, and I've done a very barebones amount of review (I > hope to do more). It really helps me to have up-to-date firmware > published somewhere central -- I guess I can take GitHub instead, but > again, why not kernel.org? If anyone else is looking at testing, they > know where to get the pieces too, and we can compare results. It can create confusion to the users if during review we make changes how firmware files are handled. Some drivers have windows style .ini files which are not ok in an upstream driver, there could be changes in the file format etc. But I have no strong opinion here, my main motivation is just to try to keep things simple for maintaining the "interface" between linux-firmware and kernel wireless drivers. My preference is that the firmware files are ready for submission when a new driver is submitted for review, but the firmware files are submitted only after the driver is accepted. -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches