From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FEB0C433E0 for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 17:05:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9702464E02 for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 17:05:47 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9702464E02 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DbR3Y1KNnzDwj1 for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 04:05:45 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (no SPF record) smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com (client-ip=134.134.136.20; helo=mga02.intel.com; envelope-from=jae.hyun.yoo@linux.intel.com; receiver=) Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DbR1d1ksNzDvWp for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 04:04:03 +1100 (AEDT) IronPort-SDR: o8lC/R2NLmZBI4JaYIhgEY4htd4a17VOfl2I+a4hO1H6jRUTlysMv4gUH9yRaduCIN2J9ASru8 af+uDZ2a4+pQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9891"; a="169237103" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,168,1610438400"; d="scan'208";a="169237103" Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Feb 2021 09:03:15 -0800 IronPort-SDR: COhltNBq578t0O54NEP0fAcABfCxYCrJyh8wqKAOdywCdAlm4fjqMHGnF/tGIX9NQo6GqGPAz2 cHuANpsm+YGA== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,168,1610438400"; d="scan'208";a="578473856" Received: from yoojae-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.212.143.190]) ([10.212.143.190]) by orsmga005-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Feb 2021 09:03:08 -0800 Subject: Re: Kernel moving to Linux v5.10, dropping PECI To: Andrei Kartashev , openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org References: From: Jae Hyun Yoo Message-ID: <155fb63f-539b-db7f-e513-d025d64cf3b3@linux.intel.com> Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 09:03:07 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "openbmc" On 2/10/2021 5:40 AM, Andrei Kartashev wrote: > On Wed, 2021-02-10 at 12:43 +0000, Joel Stanley wrote: >> The openbmc kernel will move to a 5.10 based tree for Aspeed and >> Nuoton machines. >> >> linux-openbmc: Move to Linux 5.10 >> >> This moves the OpenBMC kernel to a v5.10 base for both Aspeed and >> Nuvoton. There are 125 patches in the tree, with 80 of those >> patches not >> yet queued for merging in v5.11. >> >> Notably the PECI patchset has been dropped as the author, Intel, >> has >> elected to develop it out of tree instead of submitting it for >> mainline >> inclusion. >> >> https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/openbmc/+/40404 >> >> Regarding the PECI situation, I raised it on the list back in August. >> The conversation finished up in October with a commitment that the >> work would be done as soon as possible. >> >> This kernel config option is enabled by machines from Facebook, >> Bytedance, HPE, Lenovo, Quanta and Supermicro. (Surprisingly Intel >> doesn't enable it on their platform?). It would be great for someone >> from one of those teams to step up and submit the PECI patchset >> upstream. > > Intel enable PECI in their downstream port > https://github.com/Intel-BMC/openbmc , where they do have downstream > fork of the kernel with PECI patches: > https://github.com/Intel-BMC/linux > We used to branch from the fork for our x86 platform, so now it's > really tricky for us to follow upstream. We will very appropriate if > one will push PECI patches upstream, but this is still Intel's code > under development and this sounds a bit risky if someone but Intel do > upstreaming. > So I'd like first to see Intel's position about not to upstream the > patches: what is the problem there? > Intel will continue trying to upstreaming the PECI subsystem implementation but the next spin isn't prepared completely yet. Meanwhile, the patch set will be provided through the https://github.com/Intel-BMC/linux fork and it will move to 5.10 soon as well with rebasing the PECI patch set. Thanks, Jae >> >> In the meantime these in-tree systems will regress their PECI support >> until the patchset is submitted to mainline. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Joel