Re: [GIT PULL]: firmware patches for building firmware into kernel

[Jaswinder Singh <jaswinder@infradead.org>]

Hello Dave,

On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 14:21 -0400, David Dillow wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 23:04 +0530, Jaswinder Singh wrote:
> > Hello David Dillow,
> > 
> > On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 13:30 -0400, David Dillow wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 22:26 +0530, Jaswinder Singh wrote:
> > > >       firmware: avoiding multiple replication for same firmware file
> > > 
> > > If this is the last patch you sent to the list, I think there are still
> > > locking bugs in it. I was short on time, so I didn't give it a full
> > > review, but I remember seeing problems. I'll try to give it some time
> > > tonight, if Andrew doesn't beat me to it.
> > 
> > This is updated and revised patch.
> 
> I just looked at the tree; it still has locking issues, and needs
> further review. You must protect the list from modification while you
> iterate it looking for an match on the requested firmware. Also, was it
> legal to call release_firmware() from an atomic context? It can now
> sleep, which may be an issue...
> 

Ok, I will revise it thanks.


> > > >       typhoon: use request_firmware
> > > 
> > > This is untested -- again, no time over the weekend -- and I'd rather
> > > not have it go upstream until has been verified.
> >
> > This is also updated and revised patch.
> 
> Please drop that patch from the series for now; I'm not happy with it,
> as it reintroduces things I've asked be changed. 

You mean this :

+       /*
+        * Need to check request_firmware should be called only once
+        * so you don't leak memory if there is more than one NIC.
+        * Need to check if PCI probing gets multi-threaded as
+        * mutex is used while loading the firmware.
+        */
+       if (typhoon_fw != NULL) {
+               err = typhoon_init_firmware(tp);

This is not required now, As I already fixed request_firmware.

So it is replaced by :

+       err = typhoon_init_firmware(tp);

Do you think we still need above comments ?

Thanks you,

Jaswinder Singh.