From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Buesch Subject: Re: [patch] do not allow IPW_2100=Y or IPW_2200=Y Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 22:39:17 +0200 Message-ID: <200607112239.17405.mb@bu3sch.de> References: <20060710152032.GA8540@elf.ucw.cz> <200607102305.06572.mb@bu3sch.de> <44B3912F.3010300@gentoo.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jeff Garzik , Pavel Machek , yi.zhu@intel.com, jketreno@linux.intel.com, Netdev list , linville@tuxdriver.com, kernel list Return-path: Received: from static-ip-62-75-166-246.inaddr.intergenia.de ([62.75.166.246]:35806 "EHLO bu3sch.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750870AbWGKUhl (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Jul 2006 16:37:41 -0400 To: Daniel Drake In-Reply-To: <44B3912F.3010300@gentoo.org> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 11 July 2006 13:53, you wrote: > Michael Buesch wrote: > > Does the ipw driver _really_ need the firmware on insmod time? > > bcm43xx, for example, loads the firmware on "ifconfig up" time. > > If ipw really needs the firmware on insmod, is it possible to > > defer it to later at "ifconfig up" time? > > Is bcm43xx able to get the MAC address before the firmware is loaded? Yes. We have a PROM that is readable without firmware. (And we actually do this and did it forever. So I don't know where your assumption comes from ;) ) > Last time I checked, if the MAC address is only discovered after the > interface is created (as would be the case with ipw loading firmware on > ifconfig up, I think), interface renaming does not work. -- Greetings Michael.