Re: [PATCH][RFC] request_firmware examples and MODULE_FIRMWARE

[Jon Masters <jonathan@jonmasters.org>]

On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 17:10 +0200, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> Hi Jon,
> 
> > > > actually it has never been really a filename. It was a simple pattern
> > > > that the initial hotplug script and later the udev script mapped  
> > > > 1:1 to a filename on your filesystem. If you check the mailing list  
> > > > archives of LKML and linux-hotplug you will see that I always resisted
> > > > in allowing drivers to include a directory path in that call. A couple
> > > > of people tried this and it is not what it was meant to be.
> > 
> > That's fine. I agree with the idea - *but* it strikes me that we don't
> > really have a co-ordinated database of what module "patterns" map to
> > what on-disk firmware, aside from hotplug/udev scripts. We need to
> > co-ordinate this stuff a lot more. Or am I missing something? I'm happy
> > to setup a database on the kerneltools.org wiki if that's useful...
> 
> that is true, but it is actually not a problem of the kernel and your
> proposed MODULE_FIRMWARE patch. However it might be a good idea to start
> something like this. It will also help to see what is actually needed.

I reali[sz]e it's not a direct problem, but it does need fixing. I'll
spend some time over the weekend and then send an update about that.

Jon.