On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 02:46:56PM +0530, Animesh Manna wrote: > > > On 04/13/2015 10:52 PM, Damien Lespiau wrote: > >On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 08:15:29PM +0300, Imre Deak wrote: > >>Ok, I haven't seen that. One question is if we need to support multiple > >>interface versions or just the latest one. I would say only the latest > >>one (for each platform) and so I915_CSR_SKL should be this latest > >>firmware image filename, in this case i915/skl_dmc_ver4.bin. > >Yup, I think just supporting the latest one in the driver is what we > >want. The filename versioning is there so different kernel versions, > >supporting different interfaces, can all boot with the same userspace, > >each kernel loading the appropriate firmware. > > > Can we have a symbolic link which can be hardcoded in intel_csr.c > and option will be given to user during installing the firmware > to create a symbolic link for the firmware wanted to load. > Want to avoid version number mentioned in firmware file name as it > getting change with latest fixes, bot not any API/inteface changes. > Agree as bxt and skl both are gen9 we can name as skl_dmc_gen9.bin > for now and discussion is going to finalize the name. Is it ok? Why would we need a symlink? what would be its name? skl_dmc_gen9.bin does not answer the requirement that we need to encode the API/interface version in the filename. The firmware on 01.org skl_dmc_ver4.bin seems to be what we want. HTH, -- Damien _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
