Re: [GIT *] Allow request_firmware() to be satisfiedfrom in-kernel, use it in more drivers.

[David Woodhouse]

On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 22:45 -0700, david@xxxxxxx wrote:
> linus pointed out that the documentation reccomended the
> request_firmware();load_firmware();release() approach and stated that that 
> approach was the wrong way to do things, instead doing a request_firmware 
> early and release when the module is unloaded.
> 
> does this patch series follow the documented reccomendation? or does it 
> follow the more concervative approach Linus pointed out? (it's far faster 
> to ask then to search Internet archives for the patches)

Mostly it follows the documented recommendation, since most of the
touched drivers are USB drivers and you end up re-enumerating and
starting from scratch on resume anyway. And the remainder are so old
that they don't have suspend/resume support anyway. Remember, we're only
really updating the older drivers; newer drivers tend to use
request_firmware() already, and have done for years.

The only one I remember offhand that loads the firmware and keeps it
around is tg3 -- and I didn't ask Linus to pull that one. In fact, we
only did it that way for tg3 since that driver seems to doing _all_ its
chip reset and firmware reload (including a boatload of udelays) within
a spinlock. That in itself is probably not optimal, but it wasn't really
within the scope of what we were doing to fix it.

-- 
dwmw2

--
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/