On Tue, 2005-04-05 at 11:11 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 09:49:25AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > > I don't think you did get a rejection, a few people said that _they_ > > weren't going to do it, but if you want to then go ahead. I think people > > are just fed up of people bringing up the issue and then failing to do > > anything about it -- so prove them wrong ;-) > > Actually patches to add firmware loader support to tg3 got rejected.
I think they will be accepted if they first introduce a transition period where tg3 will do request_firmware() and only use the built-in firmware if that fails. Second step is to make the built-in firmware a config option and then later on when the infrastructure matures for firmware loading/providing firmware it can be removed from the driver entirely. One of the sticking points will be how people get the firmware; I can see the point of a kernel-distributable-firmware project related to the kernel (say on kernel.org) which would provide a nice collection of distributable firmwares (and is appropriately licensed). Without such joint infrastructure things will always be a mess and in that context I can see the point of the driver authors not immediately wanting to switch exclusively. Simply because they'll get swamped with email about how the driver doesn't work... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
