On Sat, Apr 17, 2004 at 03:33:16PM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote: > > I don't think such a complicated scheme is needed? Just encode the > microcode version in the filename and try to load any supported version, > from most to least preferred?
I think that's what I meant. Point being, have the kernel call out to a userspace loader on the driver's behalf, instead of the user running a loader like Nathaniel's in an init script or something. I was also reminding folks of the importance of versioning of the driver vs the firmware, because one of his comments seemed to imply that you could upgrade the microcode to a new version without changes to the driver. This is not always true because the command interface may change from revision to revision of the microcode. -- Ryan Underwood, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
