Re: [RFC] binary firmware and modules

[Arjan van de Ven]

On Mon, 2006-04-17 at 10:22 -0400, John W. Linville wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 15, 2006 at 11:54:22AM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > Am Samstag, 15. April 2006 10:10 schrieb Jon Masters:
> > > The attached patch introduces MODULE_FIRMWARE as one way of advertising
>  
> > Strictly speaking, what is the connection with modules? Statically
> 
> The same as MODULE_AUTHOR, MODULE_LICENSE, etc.  The divide is more
> logical than physical.
> 
> > compiled drivers need their firmware, too. Secondly, do all drivers
> > know at compile time which firmware they'll need?
> 
> They have to know what they will request, do they not?


in order to not fall in the naming-policy trap: do we need a translation
layer here? eg the module asks for firmware-<modulename>
and userspace then somehow maps that to a full filename via a lookup
table?


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/