Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH][RFC] request_firmware examples and MODULE_FIRMWARE | From | Marcel Holtmann <> | Date | Thu, 07 Sep 2006 17:10:26 +0200 |
| |
Hi Jon,
> > > actually it has never been really a filename. It was a simple pattern > > > that the initial hotplug script and later the udev script mapped > > > 1:1 to a filename on your filesystem. If you check the mailing list > > > archives of LKML and linux-hotplug you will see that I always resisted > > > in allowing drivers to include a directory path in that call. A couple > > > of people tried this and it is not what it was meant to be. > > That's fine. I agree with the idea - *but* it strikes me that we don't > really have a co-ordinated database of what module "patterns" map to > what on-disk firmware, aside from hotplug/udev scripts. We need to > co-ordinate this stuff a lot more. Or am I missing something? I'm happy > to setup a database on the kerneltools.org wiki if that's useful...
that is true, but it is actually not a problem of the kernel and your proposed MODULE_FIRMWARE patch. However it might be a good idea to start something like this. It will also help to see what is actually needed.
> I'm trying to avoid the need to have lots of different places in > userland needing to track firmware versioning. But on some level, I just > need to know that a given driver is going to ask for 1 firmware with the > ID of "foo" - and a way to extrapolate where it is on disk to package.
Let start collecting these information and then go from there.
Regards
Marcel
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |