From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 07:36:37 +0100 From: Alan Cox Subject: Re: [bug?] tg3: Failed to load firmware "tigon/tg3_tso.bin" Message-ID: <20080708073637.32037c76@the-village.bc.nu> In-Reply-To: <20080707.145819.209342070.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20080707214218.055bcb35@the-village.bc.nu> <20080707.144505.67398603.davem@davemloft.net> <20080707221427.163c4a30@the-village.bc.nu> <20080707.145819.209342070.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: David Miller Cc: jeff@garzik.org, dwmw2@infradead.org, andi@firstfloor.org, tytso@mit.edu, hugh@veritas.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, mchan@broadcom.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > That's pure bullox as far as I can see. Why provide the means to > do something nobody has had a need for in 6+ years? Who needs > to load different firmware for the tg3 driver? Who needs modules, nobody needed it for years ... you are repeating historically failed arguments still. > Who needs that capability? Distribution vendors? What for? > In what case will they need to load different firmware from > what the driver maintainer tested as a unit? For some drivers yes. Maybe not tg3. > And, btw, who has the right to enforce this new burdon upon driver > maintainers when they have had a working and maintainable system for > so long? The module argument again - see my comment about the sound driver history. > I can only see it being about separation, pure and simple. Separation - of firmware that can be paged from code that cannot. Of stuff that doesn't change from stuff that does. That happens to be good engineering. Alan -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org