Hi Grant, > On Dec 8, 2014, at 20:25 , Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, 5 Dec 2014 19:58:27 +0200 > , Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: >> Hi Grant, >> >>> On Dec 5, 2014, at 18:44 , Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >> [snip] >> >>>> For instance, if the user issued a load request for a path in a container >>>> which is the namespace under which the firmware file is located? Is it the >>>> non-container filesystem, or is it under the container filesystem that >>>> issued the request. The firmware layer does not have an API to discern. >>> >>> Wait, what? Why on earth would you want to expose this interface in a container? >>> >> >> It was a complaint raised. >> >> Look at this thread. >> >> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.documentation/27655 > > I've replied on that thread. I don't think the issues raised there > warrent two completely separate methods for loading the data into the > kernel. I want to see one method only. > The firmware interface is required and is the simplest one. If that’s OK, let’s go with that. > g. > Regards — Pantelis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
