Re: st_fdma: Firmware filename in DT?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On Fri, 11 Sep 2015, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

> On Friday 11 September 2015 10:17:00 Lee Jones wrote:
> > <hijacking>
> > 
> > That doesn't work for middle-layer drivers such as Remoteproc, where
> > it doesn't have its own associated firmwares.  Remoteproc's job is
> > simply to load the firmware.  It doesn't care which version of the ABI
> > that particular binary uses, and has no reason to.  Ideally, I guess
> > the Remoteproc client should be providing the firmware name, but why
> > should the client care who or what was used to load the firmware?
> > 
> > </hijacking>
> > 
> 
> Does remoteproc use request_firmware() then?

Yes ...

> If not, it's irrelevant to this discussion.

... but even if it didn't, it would still be relevant, as it's a
"should firmware names be in DT" discussion.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Device Tree Compilter]     [Device Tree Spec]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux PCI Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Yosemite Backpacking]
  Powered by Linux