Return-path: Received: from crystal.sipsolutions.net ([195.210.38.204]:59853 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751546AbXBMSoO (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Feb 2007 13:44:14 -0500 Subject: network manager vs. missing firmware From: Johannes Berg To: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Cc: Dan Williams Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-gopN4OhA0JVME8vDfyUh" Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 19:41:46 +0100 Message-Id: <1171392106.10344.100.camel@johannes.berg> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --=-gopN4OhA0JVME8vDfyUh Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, Just remembered this issue from last year's summit and figured I'd bring it up again since we never made progress on it. Is there any idea other than standardising on a new error code -ENOFIRMWARE that can be returned from device up or association or wherever makes sense for the driver. Or do we also mandate that it be returned on device up, and for example never on module load? I think it's mostly a question of documentation/driver acceptance policy/driver review as well as a question of whether we can get a new error code into the kernel or not......... johannes --=-gopN4OhA0JVME8vDfyUh Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: Johannes Berg (powerbook) iD8DBQBF0gZq/ETPhpq3jKURAgyzAJ9cIoIc1r8KMs2/FIaF3QoKPmlAOwCgmBh/ FeUcaTT3E5f90d8jr8jpC74= =4uTI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-gopN4OhA0JVME8vDfyUh--