From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
mchan@broadcom.com, dwmw2@infradead.org, bastian@waldi.eu.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bnx2 - use request_firmware()
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 07:41:32 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080708074132.7d403e98@the-village.bc.nu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <487293F8.30405@garzik.org>
On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 18:08:56 -0400
> > Not shipping lots of copies
> > Not leaving crap locked in kernel memory when it isn't needed
> > Letting vendors issue firmware updates (which especially in enterprise
> > space is a big issue and right now gets messy with compiled in firmware)
>
> Do these benefits justify the removal of an actively used feature, one
> more reliable than its replacement?
I think they do for a lot of drivers. And I dispute the actively used
feature claim except for a tiny number of people.
>
> >> I think it is, in fact, the driver maintainer's perogative of whether
> >> they want request_firmware() to be supported by their driver or not.
> >> It is they who have to deal with any possible fallout.
> >
> > And their users and the distributors for whom it can cause enormous pain.
>
> Where is this enormous pain associated with tg3's compiled-in firmware?
> It's been quite convenient.
How many kernel updates do you think all the worlds users and
distributors have transferred. How much bandwidth and time do you think
that cost ?
Alan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-08 7:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20080704225415.GA557@wavehammer.waldi.eu.org>
2008-07-05 9:44 ` David Woodhouse
2008-07-07 4:21 ` Michael Chan
2008-07-07 7:53 ` Bastian Blank
2008-07-07 9:03 ` David Woodhouse
2008-07-07 18:56 ` Michael Chan
2008-07-07 21:38 ` David Miller
2008-07-07 21:19 ` Alan Cox
2008-07-07 22:05 ` David Miller
2008-07-08 6:39 ` Alan Cox
2008-07-08 8:58 ` David Miller
2008-07-09 20:25 ` request_firmware vs. resume (was Re: [PATCH] bnx2 - use request_firmware()) Pavel Machek
2008-07-09 21:13 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-07-09 21:20 ` Theodore Tso
2008-07-09 21:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-07-09 22:23 ` Theodore Tso
2008-07-09 22:33 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-07-07 22:08 ` [PATCH] bnx2 - use request_firmware() Jeff Garzik
2008-07-07 23:01 ` David Miller
2008-07-08 6:41 ` Alan Cox [this message]
2008-07-08 9:00 ` David Miller
2008-07-08 3:30 ` david
2008-07-08 6:49 ` Alan Cox
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080708074132.7d403e98@the-village.bc.nu \
--to=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=bastian@waldi.eu.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mchan@broadcom.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®