Re: brcmfmac: don't warn user if requested nvram fails

[Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>]

Hi,

On 27-04-17 02:36, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 10:53:57AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:

<snip>

>>>> Right, sorry. For the pcie device I'm looking at the
>>>> name is brcmfmac4356-pcie.txt and I would like to propose
>>>> to first check for "brcmfmac4356-<pci-subsys-vid>-<pci-subsys-pid>.txt"
>>>>
>>>>> So who is going to provide these nvram files. We can not
>>>>> maintain that as there are too many variants and they are under control
>>>>> of the OEM/ODM.
>>>>
>>>> Users / people like me who are interested in using certain
>>>> devices with Linux. The idea is to at least make it possible to
>>>> have these devices just work. E.g. I would like a user to be
>>>> able to insert a USB-stick with a live Fedora 27 and then
>>>> have everything just work on the GPD win.
>>>>
>>>> To make this happen I will submit the nvram file from the
>>>> Windows install on the GPDwin to linux-firmware as
>>>> "brcmfmac4356-<pci-subsys-vid>-<pci-subsys-pid>.txt"
>>>> and yes I've checked that there are sensible values in
>>>> the subsys ids.
>>>
>>> I suppose the "nvram file from the Windows install" than has a
>>> redistributable license?
>>
>> IANAL but I fail to see how the contents of this file is
>> anything but functional and as such not copyright-able.
> 
> We take licensing serious on linux-firmware, a IANAL is no excuse for
> being sloppy.

I don't mean to be sloppy. As I already stated I plan to make it
clear in the commit msg that there is no license info for the nvram
file and that in my non expert opinion that is not a problem.

If people disagree then we will likely need to ask an actual lawyer
for advice and see from there,

Regards,

Hans