On Monday 08 December 2014 17:37:14 Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 11:18:18PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:02 PM, Pali Rohár
<pali.rohar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Saturday 06 December 2014 13:49:54 Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > /**
> > >
> > > + * request_firmware_prefer_user: - prefer usermode helper
> > > for loading firmware + * @firmware_p: pointer to firmware
> > > image
> > > + * @name: name of firmware file
> > > + * @device: device for which firmware is being loaded
> > > + *
> > > + * This function works pretty much like
> > > request_firmware(), but it prefer + * usermode helper. If
> > > usermode helper fails then it fallback to direct access.
> > > + * Usefull for dynamic or model specific firmware data.
> > > + **/
> > > +int request_firmware_prefer_user(const struct firmware
> > > **firmware_p, + const char
> > > *name, struct device *device) +{
> > > + int ret;
> > > + __module_get(THIS_MODULE);
> > > + ret = _request_firmware(firmware_p, name, device,
> > > + FW_OPT_UEVENT |
> > > FW_OPT_PREFER_USER); + module_put(THIS_MODULE);
> > > + return ret;
> > > +}
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(request_firmware_prefer_user);
> >
> > I'd like to introduce request_firmware_user() which only
> > requests firmware from user space, and this way is simpler
> > and more flexible since we have request_firmware_direct()
> > already.
>
> Why would a driver care about what program provides the
> firmware? It shouldn't at all, and we want to get rid of the
> userspace firmware loader, not encourage drivers to use it
> "exclusively" at all.
>
Do not remove it! Without userspace firmware loader it is
impossible to load dynamic firmware files.
> So no, I don't want to see this, and I don't want drivers to
> worry about this either.
>
> greg k-h
--
Pali Rohár
pali.rohar@xxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
