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=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no 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 9FDCDC433DB for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2021 07:17:45 +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 DFC4D64DBD for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2021 07:17:44 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org DFC4D64DBD Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=aspeedtech.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 4DRBd22ZqfzDrgC for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2021 18:17:42 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=fail (SPF fail - not authorized) smtp.mailfrom=aspeedtech.com (client-ip=211.20.114.71; helo=twspam01.aspeedtech.com; envelope-from=troy_lee@aspeedtech.com; receiver=) Received: from twspam01.aspeedtech.com (twspam01.aspeedtech.com [211.20.114.71]) (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 4DRBb71x9SzDr84 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2021 18:15:59 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from mail.aspeedtech.com ([192.168.0.24]) by twspam01.aspeedtech.com with ESMTP id 10S79moP098999; Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:09:48 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from troy_lee@aspeedtech.com) Received: from aspeedtech.com (192.168.100.253) by TWMBX02.aspeed.com (192.168.0.24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:15:40 +0800 Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2021 07:15:36 +0000 From: Troy Lee To: Benjamin Fair Subject: Re: Supporting new interfaces in phosphor-ipmi-flash Message-ID: <20210128071536.GA2594588@aspeedtech.com> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Originating-IP: [192.168.100.253] X-ClientProxiedBy: TWMBX02.aspeed.com (192.168.0.24) To TWMBX02.aspeed.com (192.168.0.24) X-DNSRBL: X-MAIL: twspam01.aspeedtech.com 10S79moP098999 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: , Cc: Patrick Venture , Brandon Kim , "openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org" , William Kennington Errors-To: openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "openbmc" Hi, The 01/28/2021 01:48, Benjamin Fair wrote: > On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 at 08:04, Patrick Venture wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 1:44 AM Troy Lee wrote: > > > > > > Hi team, > > > > > > For security consideration, user might want to disable AST2500/AST2600 P2A functionality by default. To compensate the effect to phosphor-ipmi-flash, we're planning to support two alternative in-band firmware upgrade over PCIe for AST2500/AST2600 (AST2520 and AST2620 are excluded): > > > - Through a reserved **VGA** memory on BAR[0], or > > > - Through a reserved **PCIe** shared memory on BAR[1] > > > > > > The usage pretty much the same as P2A, but it runs on different BAR, offset and length. > > > This will involves modifying phosphor-ipmi-flash/[tools|bmc]. Should I create new **interfaces**, e.g. astpcie/astvga? > > > > I'm not sure it makes sense to create new interfaces, but rather to > > add optional parameters for those differences... but I've added some > > people to the reply line to help answer. > > I'd also prefer optional parameters so we can keep all these PCIe > configurations grouped together. > Understood. I'll see if I can design it as parameters, either on compiler time or runtime. Thers is a little different in BMC side, the ioctl might be different. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Troy Lee > > > > > > Thanks for suggestion, Troy Lee