Re: [GIT *] Allow request_firmware() to be satisfied from in-kernel, use it in more drivers.

Sven-Haegar Koch
2008-07-16T01:04:19Z

On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, David Woodhouse wrote:

> On Tue, 2008-07-15 at 17:39 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >
> > 'make modules_install && make install' will
> > * install modules in /lib
> > * install firmware in /lib [2.6.27 only]
> > * install kernel
> > * update grub
> > * rebuild initrd
> >
> > Do this, under both 2.6.26 and 2.6.27.
> >
> > 2.6.26 will put a working driver into initrd.
> >
> > 2.6.27 will put a dead driver into initrd (because no firmware got
> > copied into initrd image).
>
> I believe your claim is untrue. It uses the distribution's tool to
> create the initrd, doesn't it? And those tools _do_ handle the
> MODULE_FIRMWARE() tags and pull in appropriate firmware. They've had to
> get that right for _years_ already.

Something from the non-development world:

At least the initramfs-tools (which contains mkinitrd) of Debian Etch do
not do this (the current testing/development version Lenny does) - no
firmware support in the initrd at all - and not needed for booting until
now.
(It has /lib/firmware support after the initrd for the not-so-important
stuff like usb/sound/video/wireless)

Yes, it may be nearly ancient by now, but for servers it contains all we
need, and most certainly would not want to use something that changes and
needs checking/hand-fixing every month - I expect this version to be still
in use a year from now, then just gradually being updated to the next
debian version.

Currently we use 2.6.24, and I expect to use some newer kernel to support
newer replacement hardware before all installs are upgraded. So having the
firmware-inside-module support would be a help for us when modules are
starting to be needed for disk or network access, keeping from the need to
try backporting huge initrd/make-kpkg changes.

c'ya
sven

--

The Internet treats censorship as a routing problem, and routes around
it. (John Gilmore on http://www.cygnus.com/~gnu/)