Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>
To:     <Ajay.Kathat@microchip.com>
Cc:     <kuba@kernel.org>, <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
        <Claudiu.Beznea@microchip.com>, <Sripad.Balwadgi@microchip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wifi: wilc1000: change firmware path from 'atmel' to
 'microchip/wilc'
References: <20230630012136.1330784-1-ajay.kathat@microchip.com>
        <20230705140338.77896d11@kernel.org>
        <5500a007-4e52-f8dc-2535-3baa7decfe52@microchip.com>
        <20230705172754.61ca21ae@kernel.org> <87cz0o2nm4.fsf@kernel.org>
        <4aef9340-7b03-43af-f211-c8e45f749e73@microchip.com>
Date:   Thu, 20 Jul 2023 17:50:15 +0300
In-Reply-To: <4aef9340-7b03-43af-f211-c8e45f749e73@microchip.com> (Ajay
        Kathat's message of "Wed, 19 Jul 2023 16:20:57 +0000")
Message-ID: <877cqu4oyg.fsf@kernel.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

<Ajay.Kathat@microchip.com> writes:

> On 7/19/23 03:37, Kalle Valo wrote:
>
>> Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> writes:
>> 
>>>> In order to address scenario#1, a fallback method that loads the FW from
>>>> the older path(/atmel) can be added in the driver. I think that change
>>>> will make it compatible for scenario#1.
>>>> Please suggest, if there is a generic/recommended approach to handle
>>>> backward compatibility for FW path change.
>>>
>>> I'm afraid you need to request from both new and old patch for some
>>> time. Push the change to linux-firmware, but make driver be compatible
>>> with both for maybe three full releases? Then the risk of someone still
>>> having stale linux-firmware goes down quite a bit.
>> 
>> I would say at least minimum of two years, preferably more to make it
>> possible to upgrade kernel on LTS distro releases.
>> 
>>> TBH renaming FW paths, much like renaming drivers is usually more risk
>>> than reward.
>> 
>> I agree, it's just extra work without no actually benefit. Maybe an
>> exception here is iwlwifi, that should be fixed as that clutters the top
>> level firmware directory with dozens of files:
>> 
>
> Definitely, this change will not have any functionality improvements. It
> will just help to organize the wilc firmware directory structure.
>
> Currently, only wilc1000 firmwares are present in linux-firmware but the
> work to support wilc3000 and wilc's next-gen device is in progress. The
> existing wilc driver will be extended and the new firmware files needs
> to be added to linux-firmware. After this change, the all firmware's can
> organized under same root directory since adding a new device firmware's
> under 'atmel' folder may not make sense.

'atmel' is only a name, I wouldn't worry about that too much. For
example we still have drivers/net/wireless/ath even though Atheros is
long gone.

> Alternatively, the new device firmware(e.g wilc3000) can be added to
> '/microchip/wilc' without changing wilc1000 firmware path. Is this
> approach okay.

I haven't seen the actual patches but in principle having a new
directory 'microchip/wilc/ in linux-firmare sounds like a good idea to
me. But better to wait for comments from others for a while before
submitting anything.

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches