Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761559AbYGORCN (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:02:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755648AbYGORB6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:01:58 -0400 Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:36262 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755570AbYGORB5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:01:57 -0400 Message-ID: <487CD7FE.9010209@garzik.org> Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:01:50 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080501) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linus Torvalds CC: david@lang.hm, Arjan van de Ven , Andrew Morton , David Woodhouse , alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [GIT *] Allow request_firmware() to be satisfied from in-kernel, use it in more drivers. References: <1216077806.27455.85.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080714164119.99c33d5b.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080714165956.7fe2d4ee@infradead.org> <487C585C.2060002@garzik.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -4.4 (----) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.2.5 on srv5.dvmed.net summary: Content analysis details: (-4.4 points, 5.0 required) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1354 Lines: 38 Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Jeff Garzik wrote: >> A more complex, multi-file inter-dependent system is more reliable than a >> single-file driver with built-in firmware, doing the same thing? > > I'm not interested in your made-up arguments. It's a simple question... you claimed A was more reliable than B, even though A is a more complex system than B. I'm curious how that works, especially given that you have claimed the _exact opposite_ in years past, by pointing out how firmware separation could mean no-boot. > Please just build everything statically. Don't use modules. They are > clearly too complex for you, adn everybody is happy. Can't you make a simple, objective, technical comparison between two systems? firmware-outside-driver has more utility and flexibility, but more things can go wrong, like driver present/firmware absent case that happens every day with today's wireless drivers. firmware-inside-driver guarantees without _any_ doubt that the firmware is present, if the driver is guarantee. There is no guarantee more solid than that. Jeff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/