On 2018-05-08 02:12 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
Clarify the provenance of the firmware loader firmware_class module name
and why we cannot rename the module in the future.
Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
.../driver-api/firmware/fallback-mechanisms.rst | 9 ++++++---
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/driver-api/firmware/fallback-mechanisms.rst b/Documentation/driver-api/firmware/fallback-mechanisms.rst
index a39323ef7d29..a8047be4a96e 100644
--- a/Documentation/driver-api/firmware/fallback-mechanisms.rst
+++ b/Documentation/driver-api/firmware/fallback-mechanisms.rst
@@ -72,9 +72,12 @@ the firmware requested, and establishes it in the device hierarchy by
associating the device used to make the request as the device's parent.
The sysfs directory's file attributes are defined and controlled through
the new device's class (firmware_class) and group (fw_dev_attr_groups).
-This is actually where the original firmware_class.c file name comes from,
-as originally the only firmware loading mechanism available was the
-mechanism we now use as a fallback mechanism.
+This is actually where the original firmware_class module name came from,
+given that originally the only firmware loading mechanism available was the
+mechanism we now use as a fallback mechanism, which which registers a
Just a tiny repeated word here, "which which".
-Andres
+struct class firmware_class. Because the attributes exposed are part of the
+module name, the module name firmware_class cannot be renamed in the future, to
+ensure backward compatibilty with old userspace.
To load firmware using the sysfs interface we expose a loading indicator,
and a file upload firmware into:
