* 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).