Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: firmware separation filesystem (fwfs) | From | Alan Cox <> | Date | 17 Apr 2003 14:12:03 +0100 |
| |
On Iau, 2003-04-17 at 02:23, David Gibson wrote: > > But so would loading it from hotplug via ioctl. It might be we want > > a clean hotplug way to ask for 'firmare for xyz'. > > True, but ioctl()s are horrid. And the driver needs to set up a > suitable device to which the ioctl() is applied, and deal with binding > the right image to the right instance, which can get messy in some
You are ignoring the main issue of discussion. I don't care if its ioctl, tcp/ip over carrier pigeon or a pipe.
fwfs is a broken idea because it leaves the data in kernel space. On a giant IBM monster maybe nobody cares about a few hundred K of cached firmware in the kernel, but the rest of us happen to run real world computers.
Catting the firmware to a device node also works fine for me as an API, but keep the firmware in userspace.
Alan
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |