Re: [PATCH] Firmware removal

2009-02-22 Thread maximilian attems 
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 03:53:22AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Here's a patch against
> .
> Still largely untested, I'm afraid.
> 
> Ben.

looks good to me.

anyway now is a good time to eventually break something.
do you send in the drm patches to airlied, so that they
land for 2.6.20 ?


tbm or dannf please add ben to the kernel alioth project.

-- 
maks
 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: [PATCH] Firmware removal

2009-02-22 Thread Martin Michlmayr 
* maximilian attems  [2009-02-22 10:58]:
> tbm or dannf please add ben to the kernel alioth project.

Done.

-- 
Martin Michlmayr
http://www.cyrius.com/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: [PATCH] Firmware removal

2009-02-22 Thread Bastian Blank 
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 03:53:22AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> --- debian/patches/series/orig-0  (revision 12898)
> +++ debian/patches/series/orig-0  (working copy)
> @@ -1,10 +1,16 @@
> -X debian/dfsg/files-1

There is a reason why this was at the beginning. See the old tg3 patches
for details.

> ++static const struct firmware *typhoon_fw;

const is already static. Why is that a global variable?

> ++pdev = platform_device_register_simple("r128_cce", 0, NULL, 0);
> ++if (IS_ERR(pdev)) {
> ++printk(KERN_ERR "r128_cce: Failed to register firmware\n");
> ++return PTR_ERR(pdev);
> ++}
> ++rc = request_firmware(&fw, FIRMWARE_NAME, &pdev->dev);
> ++platform_device_unregister(pdev);

The drm modules don't register proper devices already?

> ++/* Firmware section */
> ++#define FIRMWARE_BDX"tehuti/bdx.bin"
> ++static const struct firmware *bdx_fw;

Again, why global?

> +index efaf84d..dec67e0 100644
> +--- a/drivers/net/tehuti.h
>  b/drivers/net/tehuti.h
> +@@ -29,6 +29,7 @@
> + #include 
> + #include 
> + #include 
> ++#include 
> + #include 

This looks wrong. Nothing from firmware.h is used in this header.

> +  [ Ben Hutchings ]
> +  * Remove firmware from drivers and make them use request_firmware():
> +- mga (closes: #502666)
> +- qla1280 (closes: #502667)
> +- r128 (closes: #494007)
> +- radeon (closes: #494009)
> +- tehuti (closes: #501153)
> +- typhoon (closes: #502669)

The patches still needs to be accepted upstream.

Bastian

-- 
There is a multi-legged creature crawling on your shoulder.
-- Spock, "A Taste of Armageddon", stardate 3193.9


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: [PATCH] Firmware removal

2009-02-22 Thread Bastian Blank 
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:37:52AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> The patches still needs to be accepted upstream.

I've seen nothing on linux-kernel.

Bastian

-- 
There's a way out of any cage.
-- Captain Christopher Pike, "The Menagerie" ("The Cage"),
   stardate unknown.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: [PATCH] Firmware removal

2009-02-22 Thread maximilian attems 
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 10:58:01AM +0100, maximilian attems wrote:
> 
> anyway now is a good time to eventually break something.
> do you send in the drm patches to airlied, so that they
> land for 2.6.20 ?

obviously meant 2.6.30 ;)


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: [PATCH] Firmware removal

2009-02-22 Thread Ben Hutchings 
On Sun, 2009-02-22 at 10:58 +0100, maximilian attems wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 03:53:22AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > Here's a patch against
> > .
> > Still largely untested, I'm afraid.
> > 
> > Ben.
> 
> looks good to me.
> 
> anyway now is a good time to eventually break something.
> do you send in the drm patches to airlied, so that they
> land for 2.6.20 ?

Yes, but they haven't been merged.  I'll try again.

Ben.



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [PATCH] Firmware removal

2009-02-22 Thread Ben Hutchings 
On Sun, 2009-02-22 at 11:37 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 03:53:22AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > --- debian/patches/series/orig-0(revision 12898)
> > +++ debian/patches/series/orig-0(working copy)
> > @@ -1,10 +1,16 @@
> > -X debian/dfsg/files-1
> 
> There is a reason why this was at the beginning. See the old tg3 patches
> for details.

It needs to be placed after any patches that insert markers for unifdef.

> > ++static const struct firmware *typhoon_fw;
> 
> const is already static.

What are you talking about?  There is no connection whatsoever between
the two.

> Why is that a global variable?

This was written by Jaswinder Singh; ask him. ;-)

> > ++  pdev = platform_device_register_simple("r128_cce", 0, NULL, 0);
> > ++  if (IS_ERR(pdev)) {
> > ++  printk(KERN_ERR "r128_cce: Failed to register firmware\n");
> > ++  return PTR_ERR(pdev);
> > ++  }
> > ++  rc = request_firmware(&fw, FIRMWARE_NAME, &pdev->dev);
> > ++  platform_device_unregister(pdev);
> 
> The drm modules don't register proper devices already?

Apparently not, though there are PCI devices associated with this.  I
based this on what Jaswinder did for radeon.

> > ++/* Firmware section */
> > ++#define FIRMWARE_BDX  "tehuti/bdx.bin"
> > ++static const struct firmware *bdx_fw;
> 
> Again, why global?
> 
> > +index efaf84d..dec67e0 100644
> > +--- a/drivers/net/tehuti.h
> >  b/drivers/net/tehuti.h
> > +@@ -29,6 +29,7 @@
> > + #include 
> > + #include 
> > + #include 
> > ++#include 
> > + #include 
> 
> This looks wrong. Nothing from firmware.h is used in this header.

Right, this seems to be a holdover from an earlier version of the patch
which kept referenes to the firmware in struct bdx_priv.

> > +  [ Ben Hutchings ]
> > +  * Remove firmware from drivers and make them use request_firmware():
> > +- mga (closes: #502666)
> > +- qla1280 (closes: #502667)
> > +- r128 (closes: #494007)
> > +- radeon (closes: #494009)
> > +- tehuti (closes: #501153)
> > +- typhoon (closes: #502669)
> 
> The patches still needs to be accepted upstream.

The patch for qla1280 has been.  The others, I'll try to push again.
But this hasn't been a requirement for e.g. the tg3 patch so I don't see
why it should be for others.

Ben.



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [PATCH] Firmware removal

2009-02-22 Thread maximilian attems 
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:19:48AM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * maximilian attems  [2009-02-22 10:58]:
> > tbm or dannf please add ben to the kernel alioth project.
> 
> Done.

cool and thanks.

welcome to the team Ben! :)


-- 
maks


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: [PATCH] Firmware removal

2009-02-22 Thread Ben Hutchings 
On Sun, 2009-02-22 at 15:10 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-02-22 at 11:37 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
[...]
> > Why is that a global variable?
> 
> This was written by Jaswinder Singh; ask him. ;-)

This was clearly wrong given that firmware was loaded in the probe
function, not the module init function.  Given that firmware is not
needed outside of the probe function, I have removed the static firmware
variable from this and the tehuti driver patches.

> > > +index efaf84d..dec67e0 100644
> > > +--- a/drivers/net/tehuti.h
> > >  b/drivers/net/tehuti.h
> > > +@@ -29,6 +29,7 @@
> > > + #include 
> > > + #include 
> > > + #include 
> > > ++#include 
> > > + #include 
> > 
> > This looks wrong. Nothing from firmware.h is used in this header.
> 
> Right, this seems to be a holdover from an earlier version of the patch
> which kept referenes to the firmware in struct bdx_priv.

In fact the #include is here because tehuti.c only #includes tehuti.h.
This is strange but I don't see any point in changing this.

> > > +  [ Ben Hutchings ]
> > > +  * Remove firmware from drivers and make them use request_firmware():
> > > +- mga (closes: #502666)
> > > +- qla1280 (closes: #502667)
> > > +- r128 (closes: #494007)
> > > +- radeon (closes: #494009)
> > > +- tehuti (closes: #501153)
> > > +- typhoon (closes: #502669)
> > 
> > The patches still needs to be accepted upstream.
> 
> The patch for qla1280 has been.  The others, I'll try to push again.

I have now submitted the other patches to drm and net maintainers and
lists.

Ben.



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [PATCH] Firmware removal

2009-02-22 Thread Bastian Blank 
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 03:10:16PM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > The patches still needs to be accepted upstream.
> The patch for qla1280 has been.  The others, I'll try to push again.

Reread the patch requirements.

> But this hasn't been a requirement for e.g. the tg3 patch so I don't see
> why it should be for others.

Because some people may ignore them if they believe it is really
necessary. You are obvious none of them because you are not able to
check your changes more than with the compiler.

Bastian

-- 
Conquest is easy. Control is not.
-- Kirk, "Mirror, Mirror", stardate unknown


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: [PATCH] Firmware removal

2009-02-23 Thread Bastian Blank 
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 10:36:57PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 03:10:16PM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > The patches still needs to be accepted upstream.
> > The patch for qla1280 has been.  The others, I'll try to push again.
> Reread the patch requirements.

This even violates the rules I set for orig patches. I will not ignore
this.

Bastian

-- 
Our way is peace.
-- Septimus, the Son Worshiper, "Bread and Circuses",
   stardate 4040.7.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: [PATCH] Firmware removal

2009-02-23 Thread maximilian attems 
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 09:52:34AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 10:36:57PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 03:10:16PM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > > The patches still needs to be accepted upstream.
> > > The patch for qla1280 has been.  The others, I'll try to push again.
> > Reread the patch requirements.
> 
> This even violates the rules I set for orig patches. I will not ignore
> this.

can we please rehearse this rules.

i don't remember that they are documented somewhere.
-> http://wiki.debian.org/DebianKernelPatchAcceptanceGuidelines
is just general waver for stuff we don't want.

-- 
maks


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: [PATCH] Firmware removal

2008-10-16 Thread Ben Hutchings 
Next, a patch for firmware-nonfree that allows firmware to be read from
and installed to subdirectories as expected by some drivers.

Ben.

Index: firmware-nonfree/debian/bin/gencontrol.py
===
--- firmware-nonfree/debian/bin/gencontrol.py   (revision 12301)
+++ firmware-nonfree/debian/bin/gencontrol.py   (working copy)
@@ -97,9 +97,14 @@
 files_real = {}
 
 for root, dirs, files in os.walk(package):
-del dirs[:]
+try:
+dirs.remove('.svn')
+except ValueError:
+pass
 for f in files:
 f1  = f.rsplit('-', 1)
+if root != package:
+f = root[len(package) + 1 : ] + '/' + f
 if f in files_orig:
 files_real[f] = f, f, None
 elif len(f1) > 1:



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [PATCH] Firmware removal

2008-10-16 Thread Ben Hutchings 
Finally, the metadata for sourceless firmware that can be moved to
firmware-nonfree.

This excludes firmware for cassini and tehuti, though I have requested
useful licences for these.

Ben.

Index: firmware-nonfree/adaptec/LICENSE
===
--- firmware-nonfree/adaptec/LICENSE(revision 0)
+++ firmware-nonfree/adaptec/LICENSE(revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+(c)2001 Adaptec, Inc. By using this software you agree that it is
+licensed to you "AS IS" and that Adaptec makes no warranties,
+express or implied, regarding the Software.
+Any redistribution of this Software must include this disclaimer and
+copyright notice.
Index: firmware-nonfree/adaptec/defines
===
--- firmware-nonfree/adaptec/defines(revision 0)
+++ firmware-nonfree/adaptec/defines(revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@new
+[base]
+desc: Adaptec DuraLAN network cards
+files:
+ adaptec/starfire_rx.bin
+ adaptec/starfire_tx.bin
+longdesc: Adaptec DuraLAN network cards supported by the starfire driver
+uri: http://ftp.debian.org/debian/pool/non-free/f/firmware-nonfree
+
+[adaptec/starfire_rx.bin_base]
+desc: RX frame processor firmware
+
+[adaptec/starfire_tx.bin_base]
+desc: TX frame processor firmware
Index: firmware-nonfree/e100/LICENSE
===
--- firmware-nonfree/e100/LICENSE   (revision 0)
+++ firmware-nonfree/e100/LICENSE   (revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
+Copyright (c) 1999-2001, Intel Corporation
+
+All rights reserved.
+
+Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
+modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:
+
+ 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice,
+this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
+
+ 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice,
+this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation
+and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
+
+ 3. Neither the name of Intel Corporation nor the names of its contributors
+may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software
+without specific prior written permission.
+
+THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS ``AS IS''
+AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE
+IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE
+DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT,
+INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT
+LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR
+PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF
+LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING
+NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE,
+EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
Index: firmware-nonfree/e100/defines
===
--- firmware-nonfree/e100/defines   (revision 0)
+++ firmware-nonfree/e100/defines   (revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+[base]
+desc: Intel PRO/100 network cards
+files:
+ e100/d101m_ucode.bin
+ e100/d101s_ucode.bin
+ e100/d102e_ucode.bin
+longdesc: Intel PRO/100 network cards supported by the e100 driver
+uri: http://ftp.debian.org/debian/pool/non-free/f/firmware-nonfree
+
+[e100/d101m_ucode.bin_base]
+desc: Intel 82559 D101M microcode
+
+[e100/d101s_ucode.bin_base]
+desc: Intel 82559 D101S microcode
+
+[e100/d102e_ucode.bin_base]
+desc: Intel 82551-F and 82551-10 microcode
Index: firmware-nonfree/defines
===
--- firmware-nonfree/defines(revision 12301)
+++ firmware-nonfree/defines(working copy)
@@ -1,6 +1,9 @@
 [base]
 packages:
+ adaptec
+ ati
  bnx2
+ e100
  iwlwifi
  qlogic
  ralink
Index: firmware-nonfree/ati/LICENSE
===
--- firmware-nonfree/ati/LICENSE(revision 0)
+++ firmware-nonfree/ati/LICENSE(revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+Copyright 2000, 2007 Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
+All Rights Reserved.
+
+Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a
+copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"),
+to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation
+the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense,
+and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the
+Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
+
+The above copyright notice and this permission notice (including the next
+paragraph) shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the
+Software.
+
+THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KI

Re: [PATCH] Firmware removal

2008-10-16 Thread Ben Hutchings 
On Fri, 2008-10-17 at 00:39 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Finally, the metadata for sourceless firmware that can be moved to
> firmware-nonfree.

A "source" package including the added firmware is available at
.

Ben.



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [PATCH] Firmware removal

2008-10-23 Thread Bastian Blank 
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 12:34:38AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> I'm going to post a series of patches that aim to fix the RC bugs
> relating to sourceless firmware.

Thanks for the work on that, but can you please send all of them to
David Woodhouse and let him push them through the firmware tree?

> This is a patch against SVN which adds source for dsp56k's firmware and
> modifies the other drivers to use request_firmware, and removes the
> other firmware from the original tarball.

As already declared to the release team, I don't consider any of them
for Lenny unless forced/asked by the responsible entities (TC, ftp,
release or GR with 2:1 majority).

This is a decision under ยง3.1.1 of the constitution.

Bastian

-- 
Is truth not truth for all?
-- Natira, "For the World is Hollow and I have Touched
   the Sky", stardate 5476.4.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [PATCH] Firmware removal

2008-10-24 Thread Moritz Muehlenhoff 
On 2008-10-23, Bastian Blank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 12:34:38AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>> I'm going to post a series of patches that aim to fix the RC bugs
>> relating to sourceless firmware.
>
> Thanks for the work on that, but can you please send all of them to
> David Woodhouse and let him push them through the firmware tree?
>
>> This is a patch against SVN which adds source for dsp56k's firmware and
>> modifies the other drivers to use request_firmware, and removes the
>> other firmware from the original tarball.
>
> As already declared to the release team, I don't consider any of them
> for Lenny unless forced/asked by the responsible entities (TC, ftp,
> release or GR with 2:1 majority).

Ok, but we could still include the dsp56k source - which won't cause
regressions - into a -10 upload? (Since I suppose there will be another
upload for 2.6.26.6?)

Cheers,
Moritz


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [PATCH] Firmware removal

2008-10-24 Thread Ben Hutchings 
On Fri, 2008-10-24 at 00:40 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 12:34:38AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > I'm going to post a series of patches that aim to fix the RC bugs
> > relating to sourceless firmware.
> 
> Thanks for the work on that, but can you please send all of them to
> David Woodhouse and let him push them through the firmware tree?
[...]

Only two of them are original (mga and r128) and I've already sent those
to him.

Ben.



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part