From: "Michael Büsch" <m@bues.ch>
To: b43-dev@lists.infradead.org
Subject: b43-fwcutter: add helper script for getting firmware
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 23:35:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140801233556.7a117cf1@wiggum> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACna6ryu_Gw_sF2ec9ZkSoh=cLrX1T2FTt_2s+qkGNzWUcDnwg@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, 1 Aug 2014 23:26:55 +0200
Rafa? Mi?ecki <zajec5@gmail.com> wrote:
> No heuristics. Extracting any passed archive and looking for binary
> objects in it would *surly* contain some bugs.
>
> We update binaries (lwfinger.com/b43-firmware/) rarely, once a year
> maybe? So having a simple checksum of .tar.bz2 should make the trick.
> I need to know which archive I'm dealing with to know the location of
> .o file only.
I completely agree here.
> > And on the online-functionality:
> > How do you detect which firmware to download? Note that I thought
> > about this in the early bcm43xx days, too. The driver had special
> > versioned MODULE_FIRMWARE markers (that we removed last year or so,
> > because they were horribly outdated), so that an automatic tool
> > could decide what firmware to download. Are you going to decide
> > by kernel version? What for patched/backported kernels? The plain
> > firmware file names from the remaining MODULE_FIRMWAREs probably
> > isn't enough information.
>
> Do you think about problem of using new version of script with old
> kernel? Like using a fresh script wild old kernel that e.g. didn't
> support firmware rev 598+?
Yes.
> What about handling it in a kernel? If we ever start supporting new,
> backward incompatible, version of firmware, maybe we should use
> something like a /lib/firmware/b43-v123/?
Yes, we should _have_ done this. But we didn't.
We could simply ignore old incompatible kernels and in future do this:
> In such situation we could make script prepare both:
> /lib/firmware/b43/
> and
> /lib/firmware/b43-v123/
>
> Script wouldn't need to check for the current kernel then. And user
> could switch between kernels without changing user space.
>
> Does it make sense?
sure.
Do symbolic links to directories work for firmware fetching (Need to check
both udev and in-kernel mechanisms)
--
Michael
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/b43-dev/attachments/20140801/38c5c365/attachment.sig>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-08-01 21:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-08-01 17:41 b43-fwcutter: add helper script for getting firmware Rafał Miłecki
2014-08-01 18:44 ` Michael Büsch
2014-08-01 21:26 ` Rafał Miłecki
2014-08-01 21:35 ` Michael Büsch [this message]
2014-08-01 22:29 ` Rafał Miłecki
2015-02-18 10:03 ` Rafał Miłecki
2015-02-18 16:37 ` Michael Büsch
2015-02-18 17:26 ` Larry Finger
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=20140801233556.7a117cf1@wiggum \
--to=m@bues.ch \
--cc=b43-dev@lists.infradead.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox