IgorMitsyanko <igor.mitsyanko.os@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 11/23/2016 06:25 PM, Kalle Valo wrote: >> IgorMitsyanko <igor.mitsyanko.os@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> To clarify with you and Kalle, as persons involved with >>> linux-wireless: is my understanding correct that submitting firmware >>> into linux-fimware repository is a prerequisite to accepting new >>> driver into linux-wireless? >> In my opinion the most important is that the device is usable with an >> upstream driver so that anyone can start using the driver (if they have >> the hardware). >> >>> There is an option to start Quantenna device from internal flash >>> memory, no external binary files involved. If we will introduce this >>> functionality and remove code handling external firmware for now >>> (until firmware problem resolved), would that allow driver to be >>> reviewed/accepted? >> Do all the publically available hardware contain the firmware in >> internal flash (flashed in the factory)? Or is this something which must >> be installed separately for each board's internal flash by the user? > > Each board must have flash installed on it, preflashed in the factory > with uboot and firmware binary, otherwise board won't boot Will the preflashed firmware binary will have all the normal functionality needed by this driver? I mean that you can start an AP interface etc. > (won't boot without uboot, firmware itself is not mandatory). Are you expecting that there are devices on the field which have uboot preflashed but not the firmware? > Booting from flash is default behavior on boards that are currently on > the market, but for developemnt purpuses it's not very convenient and > harder to upgrade. Sure, I understand. >> BTW, the original mail with the firmware image didn't make it to the >> list, I guess it was too big? It would be good if you could post the >> license separately so that people can see it. >> > > I resent the email without binary patch to linux-wireless. Saw it now, thanks. -- Kalle Valo
