On Fri, 04 Mar 2022 17:14:30 +0100, Jouni Malinen wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 08:04:26AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 12:50 PM Jouni Malinen <j@xxxxx> wrote: > > > Would the following in WHENCE work for you? > > > > > > Driver: ath11k - Qualcomm Technologies 802.11ax chipset support > > > > > > File: ath11k/IPQ6018/hw1.0/board-2.bin > > > ... > > > Version: WLAN.HK.2.1.0.1-01238-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-2 > > > Notice: ath11k/IPQ6018/hw1.0/Notice.txt > > > > We'd have to teach copy-firmware.sh what to do with a "Notice:" key. > > Is there a reason "File:" wouldn't work? The intention is to install > > the notices alongside the binaries, so that would accomplish it. > > Yeah, that sounds reasonable to me. From copying/installing/distribution > view point, these can really be handled in the exact same way as the > actual firmware binaries in practice. > > > > In other words, there would be only a single "License:" line and one > > > "Notice:" line for each firmware version? The license itself (i.e., > > > LICENSE.QualcommAtheros_ath10k) is same for all the versions while the > > > set of notices (i.e., those notice.txt files) can be different based on > > > what is included in the particular build. > > > > Yes, that would help. Would you be able to adjust the existing > > entries for ath firmware in the same way? > > Yes, I'll work with Kalle to update the existing ath* WLAN cases. > > > > > > I'm still working on your other comment about notice.txt, will get back > > > > > on that later. > > > > > > This part about clearly identifying the files should be clear now, but > > > it would be good to resolve that part about the notice.txt files in > > > general before sending out an updated pull request. > > > > Given these were merged in the past, perhaps I'm being overly > > pedantic. If we can mark them as Files or Notices instead of > > Licenses, I won't hold it up. It leaves me slightly confused why > > attribution files need to reference agreements with Qualcomm, splatter > > Confidential and Proprietary throughout the file, and reference > > COPYING and README in reference to GPLv2 when the BSD license was > > clearly chosen. Perhaps that could be cleaned up in the future. > > Thanks. We'll remove most of the unnecessary information from the new > notice.txt files and that should get rid of many of the potentially > confusing parts. If that cleanup leaves something confusing in place, > we are open to cleaning these up further in followup patches, but it > would be nice to be able to get the updated versions into > linux-firmware.git without much more additional delay and yes, this > would be with the File: instead of Licence: entries for the notice.txt > files. The problem of "File:" is that it's more or less intended to be installed as the firmware files themselves, i.e. they are installed in /lib/firmware/* that can be loaded to the kernel. Putting such a random (document) file there makes me a bit nervous. We may introduce another tag to list up misc document files (e.g. "Doc:" or whatever)? Distros can pick up them and put to the appropriate places in the package, too. thanks, Takashi
