Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1664752

Re: [PATCH v9 1/5] firmware: add extensible driver data params

From Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [PATCH v9 1/5] firmware: add extensible driver data params
Date 2017-06-13 13:10 +0200
Message-ID <tRRRU-7ec-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <tP7Tb-8dq-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <tP7Tb-8dq-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <tP7Tb-8dq-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <tRPZL-65q-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On 2017-06-13 11:05, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 02:39:33PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> As the firmware API evolves we keep extending functions with more 
>> arguments.
>> Stop this nonsense by proving an extensible data structure which can 
>> be used
>> to represent both user parameters and private internal parameters.
> 
> Let's take a simple C function interface and make it a more complex
> data-driven interface that is impossible to understand and obviously
> understand how it is to be used and works!
> 
> :(
> 
> Seriously, why?  Why are we extending any of this at all?  This series
> adds a ton of new "features" and complexity, but for absolutely no 
> gain.
> 
> Oh, I take it back, you removed 29 lines from the iwlwifi driver.
> 
> That's still not worth it at all, you have yet to sell me on this whole
> complex beast.  I can't see why we need it, and if I, one of the few
> people who thinks they actually understand this kernel interface, can't
> see it, how can you sell it to someone else?
> 
> Sorry, but no, I'm still not going to take this series until you show
> some _REAL_ benefit for it.

FWIW I saw (or maybe still see?) a need to extend request_firmware* API 
to
allow silencing a warning if firmware file is missing.

I even sent a trivial patch adding support for this:
[PATCH V4 1/2] firmware: add more flexible request_firmware_async 
function
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9588787/
(I think it still applies) but it got rejected due to Luis's big rework.

To be honest after seeing this big & more complex driver data API I just
gave up and decided I don't care about false problem reports that much 
:(

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: [PATCH v9 1/5] firmware: add extensible driver data params Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> - 2017-06-13 11:10 +0200
  Re: [PATCH v9 1/5] firmware: add extensible driver data params Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl> - 2017-06-13 13:10 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v9 1/5] firmware: add extensible driver data params Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> - 2017-06-13 15:20 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v9 1/5] firmware: add extensible driver data params Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl> - 2017-06-13 16:50 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v9 1/5] firmware: add extensible driver data params "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org> - 2017-06-13 17:40 +0200
        Re: [PATCH v9 1/5] firmware: add extensible driver data params Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> - 2017-06-13 18:00 +0200
  Re: [PATCH v9 1/5] firmware: add extensible driver data params "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org> - 2017-06-13 21:50 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v9 1/5] firmware: add extensible driver data params "Li, Yi" <yi1.li@linux.intel.com> - 2017-06-14 18:00 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v9 1/5] firmware: add extensible driver data params Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> - 2017-06-18 02:30 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v9 1/5] firmware: add extensible driver data params Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> - 2017-06-19 09:40 +0200
        Re: [PATCH v9 1/5] firmware: add extensible driver data params "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org> - 2017-06-19 21:50 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v9 1/5] firmware: add extensible driver data params "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org> - 2017-06-19 21:40 +0200

csiph-web