lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jul]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [GIT *] Allow request_firmware() to be satisfied from in-kernel, use it in more drivers.
From
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 22:12:24 -0400

> David Woodhouse wrote:
> > But since I wanted this tree to be uncontentious and obviously the
> > correct thing to do, I've dropped the drivers/net changes for now
> > anyway.
> >
> > It's odd that this request has suddenly come out of the blue when we've
> > been using request_firmware() from modules for years already.
>
> Why is it out of the blue to worry about a working driver suddenly
> ceasing to work?
>
> This has nothing to do with request_firmware() itself -- its about
> having the infrastructure in place so that users do not notice the switch.

And I want to reiterate my adversion to the folks who keep saying
that being opposed to request_firmware() is just like being opposed
to modules.

That's is very far from the truth.

When module support was added, guess what? I could still build a
completely static kernel image like I always could.

And in fact, to this day, that's what I personally do because that's
how I like my kernels.

But this request_firmware() change does not allow one to get what he
could get before, which is a completely self-contained driver module
object file.

This is the difference between providing an option and making
something mandatory. This firmware split up is now mandatory.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-07-15 04:21    [W:0.177 / U:0.796 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site