From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751015AbWDQOWc (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Apr 2006 10:22:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751017AbWDQOWc (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Apr 2006 10:22:32 -0400 Received: from ra.tuxdriver.com ([24.172.12.4]:6930 "EHLO ra.tuxdriver.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751014AbWDQOWb (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Apr 2006 10:22:31 -0400 Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 10:22:19 -0400 From: "John W. Linville" To: Oliver Neukum Cc: Jon Masters , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] binary firmware and modules Message-ID: <20060417142214.GI5042@tuxdriver.com> Mail-Followup-To: Oliver Neukum , Jon Masters , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <1145088656.23134.54.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200604151154.22787.oliver@neukum.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200604151154.22787.oliver@neukum.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Apr 15, 2006 at 11:54:22AM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote: > Am Samstag, 15. April 2006 10:10 schrieb Jon Masters: > > The attached patch introduces MODULE_FIRMWARE as one way of advertising > Strictly speaking, what is the connection with modules? Statically The same as MODULE_AUTHOR, MODULE_LICENSE, etc. The divide is more logical than physical. > compiled drivers need their firmware, too. Secondly, do all drivers > know at compile time which firmware they'll need? They have to know what they will request, do they not? John -- John W. Linville linville@tuxdriver.com