Re: udev breakages - was: Re: Need of an ".async_probe()" type ofcallback at driver's core - Was: Re: [PATCH] [media] drxk: change it to use request_firmware_nowait()

From: Linus Torvalds
Date: Wed Oct 03 2012 - 18:17:30 EST

Next message: Kees Cook: "Re: Updated: [PATCH] hardening: add PROT_FINAL prot flag to mmap/mprotect"
Previous message: Lucas De Marchi: "Re: udev breakages - was: Re: Need of an ".async_probe()" type ofcallback at driver's core - Was: Re: [PATCH] [media] drxk: change it to use request_firmware_nowait()"
In reply to: Lucas De Marchi: "Re: udev breakages - was: Re: Need of an ".async_probe()" type ofcallback at driver's core - Was: Re: [PATCH] [media] drxk: change it to use request_firmware_nowait()"
Next in thread: Andy Walls: "Re: udev breakages - was: Re: Need of an ".async_probe()" type of callback at driver's core - Was: Re: [PATCH] [media] drxk: change it to use request_firmware_nowait()"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Lucas De Marchi
<lucas.de.marchi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> So maintaining the fallback or adding a configurable entry to set the
> firmware paths might be good.

Yeah, I do think we need to make it configurable. Probably both at
kernel compile time and dynamically.

The aim of having a user-mode daemon do this was that it would be easy
to configure. Sadly, if we can't trust the daemon, that is all totally
worthless.

Linus
--
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/