On Fri, Jul 07, 2023 at 11:41:48AM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 12:50:50PM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
From: Dave Airlie <airlied@xxxxxxxxxx>
This adds two tags that will go into the module info.
The first denotes a group of firmwares, when that tag is present all
MODULE_FIRMWARE lines between the tags will be ignored by new versions of
dracut.
The second makes an explicitly ordered group of firmwares to search for
inside a group setting. New dracut will pick the first available firmware
from this to put in the initramfs.
Old dracut will just ignore these tags and fallback to installing all
the firmwares.
The corresponding dracut code it at:
https://github.com/dracutdevs/dracut/pull/2309
Cc: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: linux-modules@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Dave Airlie <airlied@xxxxxxxxxx>
Lucas, did this end up working for you as well?
I didn't try this yet, no. My opinion is similar to the first version of
this series: this is the first case in which we are making the order of
2 different keys to be relevant and it doesn't look so pretty. It may
also be hard to adapt some of the drivers like i915 to intertwine the 2
modinfo keys.
However, the alternative I provided also has some flaws, so I said I'd
be ok continuing in this direction. Humn... how about merging part of my
suggestion to mitigate the duplication we have now?
- Document that when using a fw group, it's expected userspace
will consider higher versions within a group to have higher
prio and add only one of them. Thinking on a distro packaging,
it could be extended to packaging fewer blobs too.
If we agree on "firmware files within a group are version-sorted", then
we don't need the extra MODULE_FIRMWARE_GROUP_LIST, do we?
Nit: referencing dracut implementation IMO is ok, but on kernel-doc
parts we should prefer something more generic since dracut is far from
the only initrd generator nowadays.
thanks
Lucas De Marchi
Luis
