Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 14 Jul 2008 19:17:27 -0700 (PDT) | Subject | Re: [GIT *] Allow request_firmware() to be satisfied from in-kernel, use it in more drivers. | From | David Miller <> |
| |
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.
| |