[Top] [All Lists]

Re: ipw2100: firmware problem

To: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: ipw2100: firmware problem
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 02:29:42 -0400
Cc: jketreno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, vda@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, pavel@xxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ipw2100-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20050608.231319.95056824.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <42A7268D.9020402@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050608.124332.85408883.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <42A7DC4D.7000008@xxxxxxxxx> <20050608.231319.95056824.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2-6 (X11/20050513)
David S. Miller wrote:
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 02:06:05 -0400

Therefore, the easiest way to make things work today is to poke Intel to fix their firmware license so that we can distribute it with the kernel :)

Seperate firmware from the in-kernel driver is a big headache for
users.  As DaveJ has stated, people make mistakes and try to match up
the wrong firmware version with the driver and stuff like that.  And
he should know as he has to deal sift through bogus bug reports from
people running into this problem.

If it's integrated, there are no problems like this.

Early userspace is (a) shipped with the kernel source tree and (b) linked into vmlinux. That's integrated.

The firmware images will be separate from the .c files (as they should be), but the kernel hacker still controls what gets loaded, and when.

But like I said, that's where we're going, not where we are now.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>