From Linus Torvalds <> Date Wed, 3 Oct 2012 11:07:10 -0700 Subject Re: udev breakages - was: Re: Need of an ".async_probe()" type of callback at driver's core - Was: Re: [PATCH] [media] drxk: change it to use request_firmware_nowait() On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Kay Sievers <kay@vrfy.org> wrote:

>

> Nothing really "breaks", It's "slow" and it will surely be fixed when

> we know what's the right fix, which we haven't sorted out at this

> moment.



A thirty-second pause at bootup is easily long enough that some people

might think the machine is hung.



I also call bullshit on your "it will surely be fixed when we know

what's the right fix" excuses.



The fact is, you've spent the last several months blaming everybody

but yourself, and actively told people to stop blaming you:



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=827538#c12



and have ignored patches that were sent to you:



http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2012-August/006357.html



despite having clearly seen the patch (you *replied* to it, for

chissake, and I even told you in that same thread why that reply was

wrong at the time).



> I also have no issues at all if the kernel does load the firmware from

> the filesystem on its own; it sounds like the simplest and most robust

> solution from a general look at the problem. It would also make the

> difference between in-kernel firmware and out-of-kernel firmware less

> visible, which sounds good.



So now, after you've dismissed the patch that did the equivalent fix

in udev (Ming Lei's patch basically disabled your idiotic and wrong

sequence number test for firmware loading), you say it's ok to bypass

udev entirely, because that is "more robust".



Kay, you are so full of sh*t that it's not funny. You're refusing to

acknowledge your bugs, you refuse to fix them even when a patch is

sent to you, and then you make excuses for the fact that we have to

work around *your* bugs, and say that we should have done so from the

very beginning.



Yes, doing it in the kernel is "more robust". But don't play games,

and stop the lying. It's more robust because we have maintainers that

care, and because we know that regressions are not something we can

play fast and loose with. If something breaks, and we don't know what

the right fix for that breakage is, we *revert* the thing that broke.



So yes, we're clearly better off doing it in the kernel.



Not because firmware loading cannot be done in user space. But simply

because udev maintenance since Greg gave it up has gone downhill.



Linus





