Re: absolute firmware paths

[Sebastian Kuzminsky <seb@highlab.com>]

This is my final email in this thread.  I'm done.


Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> you are talking about adding a module parameter for a absolute path to
> the driver. That is putting policy into the kernel.

The modparam is already there, so the user can select from among several 
installed firmwares.  The "policy decision" is firmly in userspace.


> And again, what is the big issue with an udev rule for your development
> case?

Again?  I just addressed this point in my email yesterday:

Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote:
 > Yeah, our own udev rule and our own firmware.sh is one of the options
 > we're considering.  It'd be easy to do.  I just think it's a generally
 > good idea and I thought that upstream udev might be interested.


But, you know, whatever.  Bye now, have a good one.


-- 
Sebastian Kuzminsky
                 you are the only light there is for yourself my friend
                                                      -- Gogol Bordello