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
