From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <486D5D4F.9060000@garzik.org> Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:14:23 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [bug?] tg3: Failed to load firmware "tigon/tg3_tso.bin" References: <20080703020236.adaa51fa.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080703205548.D6E5.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> <486CC440.9030909@garzik.org> <486CCFED.7010308@garzik.org> <1215091999.10393.556.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <486CD654.4020605@garzik.org> <1215093175.10393.567.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <20080703173040.GB30506@mit.edu> <1215111362.10393.651.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <486D3E88.9090900@garzik.org> <486D4596.60005@infradead.org> <486D511A.9020405@garzik.org> <20080703232554.7271d645@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20080703232554.7271d645@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Alan Cox Cc: David Woodhouse , Theodore Tso , Hugh Dickins , Andrew Morton , KOSAKI Motohiro , mchan@broadcom.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Alan Cox wrote: >> Further, all current kernel build and test etc. scripts are unaware of >> 'make firmware_install', and it is unfair to everybody to force a >> flag-day build process change on people, just to keep their drivers in >> the same working state today as it was yesterday. > > IMHO we want firmware built in as the default for the moment. If the > firmware model makes sense (as I think it does) then the distributions > will catch up, turn it on and sort out the default behaviour - exactly as > they did all those years ago with modules, more recently with "use an > initrd" and so on. Agreed. >> as "making no sense". All these are real world examples where users >> FOLLOWING THEIR NORMAL, PROSCRIBED KERNEL PROCESSES will produce > > I hope you mean "prescribed" ;) heh, *cough* yes >> The only valid assumption here is to assume that the user is /unaware/ >> of these new steps they must take in order to continue to have a working >> system. > > To a large extent not the user but their distro - consider "make install" Actually, I was tossing that about in my head: Is it a better idea to eliminate 'make firmware_install' completely, and instead implement it silently via 'make install'? 'make install' is already a big fat distro hook... Jeff -- 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