Reply to post: Re: Firmware - Driver relation

Linus Torvalds won't apply 'sh*t-for-brains stupid patch'


Re: Firmware - Driver relation

People need to look up the form, fit, function rule which is considered best practice for all engineering change control. If one part of an assembly breaks its internal interfaces (i.e. between two software blobs, two mechanical parts, an electrical plug pinout), then that part needs to be given a new 'part' number, not just up-revised. As the mating part will have to fundamentally change too (the electrical socket needs to mate with the new plug pinout), and will not be backwards compatible, then that will need a new part number as well. The parent assembly (firmware + driver) will definitely need to be up-revised as its child parts have changed, but may need a new 'part' number if, due to the internal changes of the 'parts', its interface to the outside world changes. In this case, it makes absolute sense to always supply firmware and driver as a controlled 'assembly' of parts rather than independent parts.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019