From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com (client-ip=148.163.158.5; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com; envelope-from=anoo@linux.ibm.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) (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 47F1VQ6mkXzF7XK; Sat, 16 Nov 2019 01:50:22 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098414.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id xAFEhMPF131828; Fri, 15 Nov 2019 09:50:17 -0500 Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2w9nuqtd15-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 15 Nov 2019 09:50:17 -0500 Received: from m0098414.ppops.net (m0098414.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.36/8.16.0.36) with SMTP id xAFEhMwf131829; Fri, 15 Nov 2019 09:50:17 -0500 Received: from ppma01wdc.us.ibm.com (fd.55.37a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.55.85.253]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2w9nuqtd0n-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 15 Nov 2019 09:50:17 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma01wdc.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma01wdc.us.ibm.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id xAFEkKDB003224; Fri, 15 Nov 2019 14:50:20 GMT Received: from b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.20]) by ppma01wdc.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 2w9gy4we45-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 15 Nov 2019 14:50:20 +0000 Received: from b03ledav003.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03ledav003.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.234]) by b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id xAFEoFRl59638074 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 15 Nov 2019 14:50:15 GMT Received: from b03ledav003.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 883D96A04F; Fri, 15 Nov 2019 14:50:15 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b03ledav003.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 512F36A054; Fri, 15 Nov 2019 14:50:15 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ltc.linux.ibm.com (unknown [9.16.170.189]) by b03ledav003.gho.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 15 Nov 2019 14:50:15 +0000 (GMT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 08:51:57 -0600 From: Adriana Kobylak To: "Alexander A. Filippov" , geissonator@gmail.com, mine260309@gmail.com, gmills@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: openbmc , openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: Re: Packaging and deploying multiple firmware image types in one In-Reply-To: <8755e79fb8f5b06113a953039daa2348@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20191112074921.GA4938@bbwork.lan> <9ddc3deca00904404c72a49c4f89c8a4@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20191114075131.GA6696@bbwork.lan> <8755e79fb8f5b06113a953039daa2348@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Message-ID: <7e88ab9cf8e9698afdae885a5477da91@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Sender: anoo@linux.ibm.com User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.0.1 X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.95,18.0.572 definitions=2019-11-15_04:2019-11-15,2019-11-15 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 spamscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxlogscore=864 mlxscore=0 adultscore=0 clxscore=1015 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 impostorscore=0 suspectscore=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-1910280000 definitions=main-1911150134 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 14:50:24 -0000 >> Ok, here are my thoughts: >> The phosphor-version-software-manager might put all internal tarballs >> in the >> /tmp/images folder during processing the top level tarball. That will >> lead to >> creation of corresponding D-Bus objects. Each of them will have their >> own >> purpose, version, object path and so on. > > Yeah agree. We may still need some way to let the > phosphor-version-software-manager > know that it needs to untar the internal tarballs, maybe a very simple > MANIFEST > with a new field, then each individual tarball would have their own > MANIFEST that > creates the D-Bus versions like you mentioned. > For the bmcweb change to support the System purpose (https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/bmcweb/+/27144), Andrew had the comment about if we could have the software manager determine the .BMC, .Host, .PSU details out of a System image and populate the individual version interfaces, which further confirms that the current Version D-Bus interface is insufficient to detail the individual components of a "System" firmware image, and that workarounds like adding individual Manifest files that Alexander proposed are needed. Therefore, wanted to see what people thought about expanding the software D-Bus interface to add a 2nd version id to the path of a System version, which would contain the version information for each sub-element, but would not contain an Activation object: -- Current, leave as is for individual firmware images: /xyz/openbmc_project/software// - Activation: Ready - Purpose: .BMC - Version: 2.8.0 /xyz/openbmc_project/software// - Activation: Ready - Purpose: .Host - Version: 1.2.3 -- New expanded option for bundled images: /xyz/openbmc_project/software// - Activation: Ready - Purpose: .System - Version: CompanyZ-v1.0 /xyz/openbmc_project/software/// - Purpose: .BMC - Version: 2.8.0 /xyz/openbmc_project/software/// - Purpose: .Host - Version: 1.2.3