On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 03:14:53PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote: > On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 6:46 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > The firmware fallback code is optional. Split that code out to help > > distinguish the fallback functionlity from othere core firmware loader > > features. This should make it easier to maintain and review code > > changes. > > > > The reason for keeping the configuration onto a table which is built-in > > if you enable firmware loading is so that we can later enable the kernel > > after subsequent patches to tweak this configuration, even if the > > firmware loader is modular. > > > > This introduces no functional changes. > > > > Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/base/Makefile | 4 +- > > drivers/base/firmware_fallback.c | 661 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > drivers/base/firmware_fallback.h | 61 +++ > > drivers/base/firmware_fallback_table.c | 29 ++ > > drivers/base/firmware_loader.c | 803 +-------------------------------- > > drivers/base/firmware_loader.h | 115 +++++ > > 6 files changed, 874 insertions(+), 799 deletions(-) > > create mode 100644 drivers/base/firmware_fallback.c > > create mode 100644 drivers/base/firmware_fallback.h > > create mode 100644 drivers/base/firmware_fallback_table.c > > create mode 100644 drivers/base/firmware_loader.h > > Does it make sense to have a separate subdirectory for firmware > instead? I did this _ stuff with lkdtm and have regretted it. (I'm > likely going to make a subdirectory for it this cycle...) Sure, the only eyesore is that drivers/base/firmware.c what is that for? drivers/base/firmware_loader/ ok? Luis
