From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 16:22:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 16:21:24 -0400 Received: from 12-237-170-171.client.attbi.com ([12.237.170.171]:13662 "EHLO wf-rch.cirr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 16:20:29 -0400 Message-ID: <3DA33F70.7050504@acm.org> Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2002 15:26:24 -0500 From: Corey Minyard User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0rc3) Gecko/20020523 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH] IPMI driver for Linux, version 4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org I have put a new version of the IPMI driver on my home page (http://home.attbi.com/~minyard) that fixes a bug. A previous unannounce version is there (v3) that adds IPMB broadcast support and fixes a bug. If you are using this driver, you want to update to the newest version. These are only supplied as a patches against the previous version since the patches are small and apply to all kernel versions. If someone wants a full patch, I can do that, too. I was toying with the idea of adding a socket interface to the IPMI driver. This way, it would naturally handle separation of addressing and data, and it wouldn't take up a character device. I think I could map everything the driver does into standard network calls, and the IPMB bus is sort of a network, anyway. Does anyone have any opinions on this? -Corey PS - In case you don't know, IPMI is a standard for system management, it provides ways to detect the managed devices in the system and sensors attached to them. You can get more information at http://www.intel.com/design/servers/ipmi/spec.htm