On Sat, 6 Dec 2014 13:00:17 +0000 Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi! > > > >> * /sys/class/fpga_manager/<fpga>/firmware > >> Name of FPGA image file to load using firmware class. > >> $ echo image.rbf > /sys/class/fpga_manager/<fpga>/firmware > > > > I .. still don't think this is good idea. What about namespaces? > > The path corresponds to path in which namespace? > > I don't understand your concern here. This allows userspace to name > the FPGA bitstream that the kernel will use during request_firmware(), > and it will show up as the $FIRMWARE value in the uevent file, but it > is still the responsibility of userspace to choose what to load, and > it can freely ignore the setting of $FIRMWARE if it needs to. I think the entire model here is basically pedicated on a bogus assumption that an FPGA is a one shot device. It's not. It's a fast reloadable reusable device. A lot of work being done with FPGAs in operating systems already involves basically task switching and scheduling FPGAs as a shared resource pool. Trying to nail something together with request_firmware is several years behind the curve. >From userspace it needs to be a open, load, use, close type model, not a static or semi-static pile of mappings. Alan -- 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
