On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 09:47:41 -0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I understand this. However, a complete JTAG state machine in the kernel, plus > > an Altera firmware parser, seems to be a lot of code that could live in > > userspace. > > Moving it to userspace would mean a kernel driver that would depend on an > userspace daemon^Wfirmware loader to work. I would NAK such designs. > Why? I agree that JTAG is a lot to place in the kernel and is much better suited to be in user space. What exactly is your objection to depending on a userspace utility? There is no shortage of precedent for loading firmware in userspace (e.g. fx2 usb devices). > > If I understand it correctly the driver assumes the firmware is in an Altera > > proprietary format. If we really want JTAG code in the kernel we should at > > least split the file parser and the TAP access code. > > > > Agreed, but I don't think this would be a good reason to block the code merge > for .38. > I agree with the above isn't good reason to block it but if there is still debate about the general architecture of the code (see above), then it seems aren't ready yet. The code looks very nice, but I'm not at all convinced that it needs to be in the kernel. Just my two-tenths of a cent. Cheers, - Ben -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
