Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 09:08:19PM CET, jacob.e.kel...@intel.com wrote: >All drivers which implement the devlink flash update support, with the >exception of netdevsim, use either request_firmware or >request_firmware_direct to locate the firmware file. Rather than having >each driver do this separately as part of its .flash_update >implementation, perform the request_firmware within net/core/devlink.c > >Replace the file_name parameter in the struct devlink_flash_update_params >with a pointer to the fw object. > >Use request_firmware rather than request_firmware_direct. Although most >Linux distributions today do not have the fallback mechanism >implemented, only about half the drivers used the _direct request, as >compared to the generic request_firmware. In the event that >a distribution does support the fallback mechanism, the devlink flash >update ought to be able to use it to provide the firmware contents. For >distributions which do not support the fallback userspace mechanism, >there should be essentially no difference between request_firmware and >request_firmware_direct. > >Signed-off-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.kel...@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Jiri Pirko <j...@nvidia.com>
