To respond to one issue in your wall-of-text response: On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 09:35:22PM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > You may argue that *one* upstream users is not sufficient to introduce a new > feature for, but I disagree given we have had new full *API* added for a new > feature on the firmware API even for drivers THAT ARE NOT UPSTREAM! For > instance request_firmware_into_buf() has no upstream users!!!
That's not acceptable at all, I'll send a patch after this to remove that. We don't keep apis around with no in-kernel users, you know this. > Now, you might say that even though this is true that there many users of > out-of-tree drivers that need this. While true, if this is the bar we'd go > with, we can't then ignore the iwlwifi userbase, and the possible gains of > having a proper non-recursive use of the daisy chained requests. Nope, I don't care about out-of-tree drivers as we have no idea what is going on there at all. I've always had this position. Patch forthcoming. greg k-h