Re: Firmware versioning best practices: ath3k-2.fw rename or replace ath3k-1.fw ?

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

 



Hi Henry,

> > > Marcel had answered me before. It makes sense to have same file name.
> > > Other ways we end up changing the driver whenever there is a firmware 
> > > change.
> > 
> > > > I last tried to document a thread we had over this here:
> > > >
> > > > http://wireless.kernel.org/en/developers/Documentation/firmware-versioning
> > > >
> > 
> > Thanks, I've updated that link above to document bug fixing does not require
> > a filename change.
> 
> I don't really understand why you would not want to change the code revision
> part of the filename.  
> 
> I totally agree that you don't want to change the driver every time the
> firmware gets a bug fix, but wasn't that the whole point of splitting the name
> into API and code revisions portions, and symlinking the file to one that just
> has the API version?
> 
> What's the issue with using the process as originally documented?

as I stated before, for Bluetooth this makes no sense. You don't need
API version numbers since the API is a STANDARD. It is called HCI. So
please don't use API version numbers in the firmware files.

I will reject firmware file versions for upstream drivers.

Regards

Marcel


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bluetooth" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Bluez Devel]     [Linux Wireless Networking]     [Linux Wireless Personal Area Networking]     [Linux ATH6KL]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Media Drivers]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Big List of Linux Books]

  Powered by Linux