On 10/04/2013 10:44 AM, Michal Simek wrote: > > If you look at it in general I believe that there is wide range of > applications which just contain one bitstream per fpga and the > bitstream is replaced by newer version in upgrade. For them > firmware interface should be pretty useful. Just setup firmware > name with bitstream and it will be automatically loaded in startup > phase. > > Then there is another set of applications especially in connection > to partial reconfiguration where this can be done statically by > pregenerated partial bitstreams or automatically generated on > target cpu. For doing everything on the target firmware interface > is not the best because everything can be handled by user > application and it is easier just to push this bitstream to do > device and not to save it to the fs. > > I think the question here is if this subsystem could have several > interfaces. For example Alan is asking for adding char support. > Does it even make sense to have more interfaces with the same > backend driver? When this is answered then we can talk which one > make sense to have. In v2 is sysfs and firmware one. Adding char > is also easy to do. > Greg, what do you think? I agree that the firmware interface makes sense when the use of the FPGA is an implementation detail in a fixed hardware configuration, but that is a fairly restricted use case all things considered. -hpa -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
