From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261518AbVFCTau (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jun 2005 15:30:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261513AbVFCTat (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jun 2005 15:30:49 -0400 Received: from mail.kroah.org ([69.55.234.183]:41671 "EHLO perch.kroah.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261341AbVFCTaH (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jun 2005 15:30:07 -0400 Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2005 12:29:53 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Abhay_Salunke@Dell.com Cc: marcel@holtmann.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org, Matt_Domsch@Dell.com Subject: Re: [patch 2.6.12-rc3] dell_rbu: Resubmitting patch for new DellBIOS update driver Message-ID: <20050603192953.GA7435@kroah.com> References: <367215741E167A4CA813C8F12CE0143B3ED3A9@ausx2kmpc115.aus.amer.dell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <367215741E167A4CA813C8F12CE0143B3ED3A9@ausx2kmpc115.aus.amer.dell.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 02:00:37PM -0500, Abhay_Salunke@Dell.com wrote: > > > > > > > > No no no. Just because you are using the firmware interface, does > not > > > > mean you need to add this extra round-trip to the whole system. > Just > > > > dump the firmware to the /sys/firmware/whatever... file whenever > you > > > > want to, that's all that is needed. No hotplug stuff, no filename > > > > stuff, just a simple copy. > > > Greg, all the feedback gave the impression that request_firmwae > hotplug > > > stuff was the way to go. > > > > It is the way to go. > > > > > Seems it's not required! > > > > Not at all, why do you think I mean that? > I meant this driver does not need hotplug per say and just a copy should > be enough (if we decide to go with bin attribute for data file). But the firmware code handles the memory stuff that you duplicated already. That's a big win too. > > > Now that means it needs to be done the way it was before except that > > > it needs to have a bin attribute for data and a normal attribute for > > > size. This would be even better as it makes it easy to read back > the > > > data. > > > > No, you can still use the firmware core code, that's what it is there > > for. But don't mess with the "make the user provide a filename" > stuff. > > Just have your driver create the firmware request and then relax. > Your > > code will get called when the firware is written to, right? That's > all > > you need. > > > At what point I should be calling request_firmware? Never, you should call request_firmware_nowait() instead. And do it from your module init function. > As my driver does > not have any entry points. In this driver it is called when the user is > ready to download the firmware image (when it echoes the firmware image > name). Also the driver needs to be resident for handling multiple such > requests; that's why cannot do this at driver init time. That's what request_firmware_nowait() is for. > When ever the user echoes the file name, it gets passed on to > request_firmware and the $FIRMWARE env gets populated with the file > name. thus making the hotplug code to automatically load the image which > is passed back as fw->data and fw->size. It's easier for the user to just copy the firmware to the sysfs file whenever they want to. No messing with hotplug events or filenames. thanks, greg k-h