* on bnx2x firmware...
@ 2011-11-02 1:01 Maciej Żenczykowski
2011-11-02 4:36 ` Ben Hutchings
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Maciej Żenczykowski @ 2011-11-02 1:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linux NetDev
((v3.1))$ cat drivers/net/bnx2x/bnx2x_hsi.h | egrep BCM_5710_FW_
#define BCM_5710_FW_MAJOR_VERSION 7
#define BCM_5710_FW_MINOR_VERSION 0
#define BCM_5710_FW_REVISION_VERSION 23
#define BCM_5710_FW_ENGINEERING_VERSION 0
So the desired firmware is version 7.0.23.0
((v3.1))$ find | egrep bnx2x | egrep fw
./firmware/bnx2x/bnx2x-e1-6.2.9.0.fw.ihex
./firmware/bnx2x/bnx2x-e2-6.2.9.0.fw.ihex
./firmware/bnx2x/bnx2x-e1h-6.2.9.0.fw.ihex
./drivers/net/bnx2x/bnx2x_fw_defs.h
./drivers/net/bnx2x/bnx2x_fw_file_hdr.h
So it doesn't look like the in-tree fw matches the bnx2x driver in
released v3.1.
I can find this firmware in the firmware repository.
My questions are:
- is this a bug (and the firmware repo will be merged into a stable
3.1 update),
- is this a feature, and the 6.2.9.0 firmwares will be removed from the tree?
I guess I'm just not clear on what the current firmware policy is, we
seem to be in some weird half-state.
Thanks,
Maciej.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: on bnx2x firmware...
2011-11-02 1:01 on bnx2x firmware Maciej Żenczykowski
@ 2011-11-02 4:36 ` Ben Hutchings
2011-11-03 4:36 ` Maciej Żenczykowski
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Ben Hutchings @ 2011-11-02 4:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Maciej Żenczykowski; +Cc: Linux NetDev
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1007 bytes --]
On Tue, 2011-11-01 at 18:01 -0700, Maciej Żenczykowski wrote:
> ((v3.1))$ cat drivers/net/bnx2x/bnx2x_hsi.h | egrep BCM_5710_FW_
>
> #define BCM_5710_FW_MAJOR_VERSION 7
> #define BCM_5710_FW_MINOR_VERSION 0
> #define BCM_5710_FW_REVISION_VERSION 23
> #define BCM_5710_FW_ENGINEERING_VERSION 0
>
> So the desired firmware is version 7.0.23.0
>
> ((v3.1))$ find | egrep bnx2x | egrep fw
> ./firmware/bnx2x/bnx2x-e1-6.2.9.0.fw.ihex
> ./firmware/bnx2x/bnx2x-e2-6.2.9.0.fw.ihex
> ./firmware/bnx2x/bnx2x-e1h-6.2.9.0.fw.ihex
> ./drivers/net/bnx2x/bnx2x_fw_defs.h
> ./drivers/net/bnx2x/bnx2x_fw_file_hdr.h
>
> So it doesn't look like the in-tree fw matches the bnx2x driver in
> released v3.1.
> I can find this firmware in the firmware repository.
[...]
That's where it belongs. But there is some confusion/disagreement on
this point.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Sturgeon's Law: Ninety percent of everything is crap.
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: on bnx2x firmware...
2011-11-02 4:36 ` Ben Hutchings
@ 2011-11-03 4:36 ` Maciej Żenczykowski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Maciej Żenczykowski @ 2011-11-03 4:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ben Hutchings; +Cc: Linux NetDev
I'm assuming this means a patch to remove the obsolete/old fw from the
kernel would be accepted?
[btw. not a fan of the out-of-tree firmware, since I have to fix the
build system to work around this, but whatever, the current
schrodinger half-state is even worse...]
- Maciej
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-11-03 4:36 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-11-02 1:01 on bnx2x firmware Maciej Żenczykowski
2011-11-02 4:36 ` Ben Hutchings
2011-11-03 4:36 ` Maciej Żenczykowski
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).