From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [168.119.38.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF3AF2747F for ; Wed, 17 Apr 2024 12:45:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1713357907; cv=none; b=oS9xzbGc9dxVdEZLZPhC9dskr8AZ8Lohz3IUnJlHSM+hkNB4033/kQunZ3FWt8z4Q4EFFLf6jfqkyWpUNeQ6gAwX4kp3yIsP5CYiPaeKfLc6rWaXO/bczngc8n1z0uOKH21vORa0K2Sevo9etf15wLYMUgQ3cPzMzA45Q2GjF+I= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1713357907; c=relaxed/simple; bh=TIFZgx/UP5ReykFyZF9ue7Do7joElMA0D1t2D0C0UyU=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=YtN1LghOLt4D/YCvWogvGcSG4IZUcVAiC1S4jefaKAEWSymvPH0xGSzWUlf9c4xMCeNr8+Kty1e+fykT0k1Q3ppUi2R5t+Bbh5aUzfGh8Wm8wX89wm1cqUDnop9Zj7mAJzuie6x+Lbzwr80eeXIPQPVoyTXIl7RAOo7ncYTVE1Q= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b=omHp3qU1; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b="omHp3qU1" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sipsolutions.net; s=mail; h=MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID; bh=vpwzE1bpZTDppIPqoYwwmYNQwAclFkUquLNCZZHL2FU=; t=1713357905; x=1714567505; b=omHp3qU1Y2JA7bbtT8vNI95vNvpMUEV3CvpGLWOcudTQMYP AevvPbe+tcen+JImPJlCsVuiTZ2mijyRiGAmlNnVvstITGhlW3JGjpX6hr1g2hyofdac4Av97isqE pTnRSRJMDDVUZJXuECL4kWYmtvyisLnRU+H0g9yHzvg2wFYgE9+R1CaZ1Ya2bMVDuTctWfppJDXlY 0j4UZj6p0rfe16Sb5CoR6VpMk8QDs0PhzA4wHvF2XwfYZCEjf6JCmjN1O0HtWDk7TEdBWDnSjwk0n OYBme1LFrHu7qQ+VbqPYdXC1iA83kdWcDMvfOdE1UlkTk8+JRK9+I6ZKSyYbJ2CA==; Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.97) (envelope-from ) id 1rx4es-0000000Ax74-1qr9; Wed, 17 Apr 2024 14:45:02 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: putting future iwlwifi firmware into intel/ ? From: Johannes Berg To: Mario Limonciello , linux-firmware@kernel.org Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, miriam.rachel.korenblit@intel.com Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 14:45:01 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <9aa64d50-cb4d-4118-bc27-86c23410ff8b@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.50.4 (3.50.4-1.fc39) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-malware-bazaar: not-scanned On Wed, 2024-04-17 at 07:42 -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote: >=20 > On 4/17/24 07:39, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Wed, 2024-04-17 at 07:31 -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote: > > >=20 > > > On 4/17/24 06:18, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > >=20 > > > > Since I was just looking at some firmware related thing (files for = the > > > > hardware that might be shared between Intel BT and WiFi), I noticed= that > > > > just over 30% of the files/dirs in the top-level firmware tree are > > > > iwlwifi-* files. > > > >=20 > > > > While we can't move the files that older drivers might consume, we = could > > > > e.g. change the driver to look up future versions/future hardware u= nder > > > > intel/ instead? Would that be worth doing? > > > >=20 > > > > johannes > > > >=20 > > >=20 > > > How about moving them all now and then creating compat symlinks for > > > older kernels at linux-firmware 'make install' time? > > >=20 > >=20 > > Didn't realize there even was a 'make install' time :-) > >=20 > > But then I guess it'd be simpler in the driver since we could just > > unconditionally add the intel/ prefix to the request_firmware call. > >=20 > > johannes >=20 > Do both. All the stuff already there add the compat symlinks in linux= =20 > firmware so that current and older kernels work with older hardware. >=20 > Any "new firmware" only put in the new path, and add commits to the=20 > kernel to look for "all" firmware in the new path. >=20 > Should hopefully cover everything without too much pain then. Yeah, I guess. Though not actually sure, do we need to support new kernel + old firmware install? johannes