Re: [patch net-next] cxgb3: update firmware version

From: Rick Jones
Date: Tue Feb 14 2012 - 13:17:31 EST


What does an end-user/customer see and do? When they are told that version the firmware, specified down to the fix level, fixes a problem they are having, how will they know that firmware blob filename drvfw-X.bin on a download/archive site has that fix? Yes, the support folks can say "It is the drcfw-X.bin file which is 12345 bytes in size with the MD5sum of <blah> but the principle of the telephone game dictates the size and/or MD5sum information will drop as "the word" passes from one person to another. And one cannot run ethtool_ops::get_drvinfo against a website. Two versions may indeed be "compatible" in terms of interfaces, but they won't be identical in terms of desirability. As such, for them to be contained in files with identical names just seems like asking for confusion.

Firmware is something of a tiny kernel no? Would we have everyone name vmlinux files with just a major number?

rick jones
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/