Am 28.11.2016 um 20:01 schrieb IgorMitsyanko: > On 11/28/2016 08:33 PM, Oleksij Rempel wrote: >> Am 28.11.2016 um 18:10 schrieb Oleksij Rempel: >>> Am 28.11.2016 um 17:34 schrieb Kyle McMartin: >>>> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 9:44 AM, IgorMitsyanko >>>> <igor.mitsyanko.os@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> Hi Ben, Kyle, >>>>> could you please share what is the position of linux-firmware >>>>> regarding >>>>> firmware binaries that include GPL components? Does it require >>>>> entire GPL >>>>> components codebase be present in linux-firmware tree, or maybe >>>>> having this >>>>> clause in license file is enough: >>>>> +Open Source Software. The Software may include components that are >>>>> licensed >>>>> +pursuant to open source software (“Open Source Components”). >>>>> Information >>>>> +regarding the Open Source Components included with the Software is >>>>> available >>>>> +upon request to oslegal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx. To the extent such Open Source >>>>> +Components are required to be licensed to you under the terms of a >>>>> separate >>>>> +license (such as an open source license) then such other terms >>>>> shall apply, >>>>> and >>>>> +nothing herein shall be deemed or interpreted to limit any rights >>>>> you may >>>>> have >>>>> +under any such applicable license. >>>>> >>>>> From technical perspective, size of the codebase used to build >>>>> Quantenna >>>>> firmware is a few hundred MBs, it seems too much to include into >>>>> linux-firmware tree. >>>>> >>>> I don't have strong feelings one way or another. I'd prefer not having >>>> several hundred >>>> MB of source that's unlikely to change included in the linux-firmware >>>> git tree. I'm also not >>>> a lawyer, so I can't help you decide what would satisfy the >>>> distribution clause of the GPLv2. >>>> We already have one GPL firmware (carl9170fw) which includes the >>>> source, but just references >>>> a seperate toolchain for downloading, so it's only approximately 1MB >>>> in size in the tree. >>>> >>>> Is your firmware source really that large, or is it just including the >>>> entire build toolchain with it? >>>> >>>> regards, >>>> --Kyle >>> We also have open BSD licensed open-ath9k-htc-firmware. Which is locate >>> out of source too. >>> https://github.com/qca/open-ath9k-htc-firmware >>> and here is location of carl firmware: >>> https://github.com/chunkeey/carl9170fw >>> >>> So, what is actual problem with Quantenna QSR10G FW? >>> I would be really interesting to take a look on it. Is it somewhere >>> available? Are there some devices to get hand on? >> After seeing specs of this device i have strong feeling that "some open >> source part" is actual linux kernel. >> >> > Oleksij, yes, that's correct, it includes entire Linux environment; the > reasoning is that it allows to hide all WiFi-related logic inside device > itself, and emulate simple Ethernet device for external system > (therefore, freeing external system resources). > > This approach was working really well for us until recently, but now > that company is expanding, we want to have more flexible and standardize > interface available for external system to manage wireless connection, > and FullMAC driver seems to be the best solution here. you mean, this driver will not use mac80211 framework provided by kernel? > For the availability of FW sources, QSR10G-based products are still > under development at this moment (not in the market yet), but many > products based on previous generation chipset QSR1000 are available. For > example, Asus has a retail design with QSR1000 chipset, and has all GPL > sourcecode available on their website (including what Quantenna has > provided): > > http://www.asus.com/Networking/RTAC87U/HelpDesk_Download/ > Quantenna provided code is in, for example, "GPL of ASUS RT-AC87U for > firmware 3.0.0.4.378.7410" archive. > It's basically the same as used for QSR10G. Will Quantenna provide documentation for at least old chipsats? Playing fair with OSS developer community has some advantages :) -- Regards, Oleksij
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
