From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: mchan@broadcom.com
Cc: dwmw2@infradead.org, bastian@waldi.eu.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bnx2 - use request_firmware()
Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2008 14:38:03 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080707.143803.99767036.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1215456981.5532.20.camel@dell>
From: "Michael Chan" <mchan@broadcom.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2008 11:56:21 -0700
> The driver is not guaranteed to be backward or forward compatible with
> the firmware. It may be forward compatible in most cases (new firmware
> may work with older driver) but there is no guarantee because it is
> simply not necessary in the current model.
>
> We also only test 1 driver + 1 firmware and no other combinations.
> Separating the 2 makes things more complicated and prone to random
> failures.
Right.
I want to know what the actual "use case" is of this new stuff.
Who in the world is going to actually want request_firmware() to find
a firmware image other than the one which has been properly tested
together with the driver by the driver maintainer?
What "use case" is there other than the desire to seperate out the
firmware in order to skirt the legal issues?
These drivers which include their own firmware and do not use
request_firmware() are functioning perfectly fine, have done so for
many many years, and gain zero by having request_firmware() support.
I think it is, in fact, the driver maintainer's perogative of whether
they want request_firmware() to be supported by their driver or not.
It is they who have to deal with any possible fallout.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-07 21:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20080704225415.GA557@wavehammer.waldi.eu.org>
2008-07-05 9:44 ` [PATCH] bnx2 - use request_firmware() David Woodhouse
2008-07-07 4:21 ` Michael Chan
2008-07-07 7:53 ` Bastian Blank
2008-07-07 9:03 ` David Woodhouse
2008-07-07 18:56 ` Michael Chan
2008-07-07 21:38 ` David Miller [this message]
2008-07-07 21:19 ` Alan Cox
2008-07-07 22:05 ` David Miller
2008-07-08 6:39 ` Alan Cox
2008-07-08 8:58 ` David Miller
2008-07-09 20:25 ` request_firmware vs. resume (was Re: [PATCH] bnx2 - use request_firmware()) Pavel Machek
2008-07-09 21:13 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-07-09 21:20 ` Theodore Tso
2008-07-09 21:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-07-09 22:23 ` Theodore Tso
2008-07-09 22:33 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-07-07 22:08 ` [PATCH] bnx2 - use request_firmware() Jeff Garzik
2008-07-07 23:01 ` David Miller
2008-07-08 6:41 ` Alan Cox
2008-07-08 9:00 ` David Miller
2008-07-08 3:30 ` david
2008-07-08 6:49 ` Alan Cox
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080707.143803.99767036.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=bastian@waldi.eu.org \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mchan@broadcom.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox