From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lee Jones Subject: Re: st_fdma: Firmware filename in DT? Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 10:39:12 +0100 Message-ID: <20150911093912.GR3260@x1> References: <20150903144944.GC7093@griffinp-ThinkPad-X1-Carbon-2nd> <20150910141809.GA21497@griffinp-ThinkPad-X1-Carbon-2nd> <20150911091700.GI3260@x1> <2118137.GXlnLUTVv7@wuerfel> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2118137.GXlnLUTVv7@wuerfel> Sender: devicetree-spec-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Peter Griffin , Daniel Thompson , Rob Herring , Warner Losh , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , Vinod Koul , "devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Maxime Coquelin , Patrice Chotard , Ludovic Barre , "devicetree-spec-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" On Fri, 11 Sep 2015, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday 11 September 2015 10:17:00 Lee Jones wrote: > > > >=20 > > That doesn't work for middle-layer drivers such as Remoteproc, wher= e > > it doesn't have its own associated firmwares. Remoteproc's job is > > simply to load the firmware. It doesn't care which version of the = ABI > > that particular binary uses, and has no reason to. Ideally, I gues= s > > the Remoteproc client should be providing the firmware name, but wh= y > > should the client care who or what was used to load the firmware? > >=20 > > > >=20 >=20 > Does remoteproc use request_firmware() then? Yes ... > If not, it's irrelevant to this discussion. =2E.. but even if it didn't, it would still be relevant, as it's a "should firmware names be in DT" discussion. --=20 Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org =E2=94=82 Open source software for ARM SoCs =46ollow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog