From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=aj.id.au (client-ip=64.147.123.25; helo=wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com; envelope-from=andrew@aj.id.au; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=aj.id.au Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=aj.id.au header.i=@aj.id.au header.b="T3PgZtFK"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="sgsS4b/9"; dkim-atps=neutral X-Greylist: delayed 430 seconds by postgrey-1.36 at bilbo; Tue, 07 Aug 2018 09:11:20 AEST Received: from wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41ktgX2Kw1zDqBy for ; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 09:11:20 +1000 (AEST) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id C80ED1D8; Mon, 6 Aug 2018 19:04:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from web5 ([10.202.2.215]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 06 Aug 2018 19:04:05 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=aj.id.au; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=cY0tAEJfZQQ3p/VI4vJ4qPLXp/JWd GE+5Q+4q5z/KO8=; b=T3PgZtFKxJIfxFkrAX0CHpD4qc+jQD869JhjMD4c8kbN6 woNcK5lE6Y9YuOcZg6i8yU8PY+rNxFDGNG4Yv1pkOcqAEdCn/sZnPPNsCHVGaGF8 Gn1a6W3p8GJwXiyS5T+BhE98gSFWFHpqCtUoTuaZQBtiW5JgflgaXECYIXllMthH e7yi5bnn1KDD0kgMJZXB83ndqSotXNSCyujbK2I0FSkMPXFMCSnbuKTzWlKfWreh 2N2vzG4r8CDGECrOw8fkfBpb5rWATqbKGUK4E9gpC/5YGVT4HFzQqaOSZUxv/3+w j3m7NPLNzsmNVW4NJq26+BWSVtzeiB0vvlqWlG8EQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=cY0tAE JfZQQ3p/VI4vJ4qPLXp/JWdGE+5Q+4q5z/KO8=; b=sgsS4b/9HBxxwcOgtTCkYW iAkquqvPKqn+/UdMcsi9Kp9znZlEfMrSJWm5bkHdvWO0A2TcVCot7Qbzb9xNCzcV 2oQehYKdzthL5APxydbZ1P15WfrAEKt8g5WznNbnHeyA2yR+6jCruJozajPSPTqn VA95+/RQSu/KWS6QSslWXymrp2U01BQvmNjTuvbjW7aHxy0yDY7vb5F50uIH37D4 yGHyeR/0PyH0XIfKONcSAjsELyjzX4wZJlpuNIlmiJEvZpkbf5Dq1JK8TEA9+3R5 o7TkuLYeEzGzdygooboFDmjoc/5gUkC4DoTyw/mKejvCUi1APp2LIRN7Mlod07Fw == X-ME-Proxy: X-ME-Sender: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 99) id 1E24D9E0F6; Mon, 6 Aug 2018 19:04:03 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <1533596643.2696676.1465549384.610418DC@webmail.messagingengine.com> From: Andrew Jeffery To: Ed Tanous , Patrick Venture , Matt Spinler , Robert Lippert , Brad Bishop , Nancy Yuen Cc: Vernon Mauery , OpenBMC Maillist , openbmc MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-2be8cd1b Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2018 08:34:03 +0930 Subject: Re: In-Band Firmware Update References: <20180723221837.GI105329@mauery> <7BB65E38-8F1D-4723-B1C5-74102D4D0B20@fb.com> <6491f54b7b2da630cd3796c6bc3a5214@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <5627e085-571f-02ef-306d-07874eae5109@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <5627e085-571f-02ef-306d-07874eae5109@intel.com> X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2018 23:11:20 -0000 > I'd be interested in separating out the "file like" nature from the > interface, and keep it as just a "block level" update, that may be a > file, or may be something else. > A slight tangent, but I think it's worth talking about here: On OpenPOWER systems we developed a control protocol for the host to manipulate the LPC FW mapping. v3 of the protocol included support for mapping "arbitrary" stuff into the FW space with a command to list what devices were available. It seems very similar to what Patrick has outlined, though operates at the block level as Ed mused about above. Typically this mechanism is used for the host to access its firmware which - again on OpenPOWER designs - sits on a flash device owned by the BMC. The control protocol was run over the LPC mailbox available on ASPEED BMCs. However, I am currently developing a PoC IPMI replacement for the mailbox interface, and intended to use much the same command-set and argument layout as we have with the mailbox. As mentioned above it aligns pretty well with what Patrick is proposing. So our use-case has less of an update focus, but at the end of the day if you can perform arbitrary writes it roughly amounts to the same thing. Should we expand the scope to cover my use-case here? I'm fine if the answer is "no", but with the similarities it seemed necessary to bring up. Cheers, Andrew PS: The bits - Repository: https://github.com/openbmc/mboxbridge Protocol documentation: https://github.com/openbmc/mboxbridge/blob/master/Documentation/mbox_protocol.md Implementation notes: https://github.com/openbmc/mboxbridge/blob/master/Documentation/mboxd.md