linux-acpi.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: ykzhao <yakui.zhao@intel.com>
To: Corey Minyard <minyard@acm.org>
Cc: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>,
	"lenb@kernel.org" <lenb@kernel.org>,
	"openipmi-developer@lists.sourceforge.net"
	<openipmi-developer@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	"linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@hp.com>,
	Myron Stowe <myron.stowe@hp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v6 2/2] IPMI: use ACPI detection mechanism firstly to detect IPMI system interface
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 10:34:55 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1276137295.4564.22.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C0F9264.8000008@acm.org>

On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 21:08 +0800, Corey Minyard wrote:
> ykzhao wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 09:34 +0800, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >   
> >> On Tue, Jun 08, 2010 at 09:28:51AM +0800, ykzhao wrote:
> >>
> >>     
> >>> Does there exist the ACPI detection mechanism on the machines you
> >>> mentioned? If exists, does it detect the same IPMI interface with the
> >>> PCI IPMI detection mechanism?
> >>>       
> >> What is "the same"? It's not using the same ioport space, certainly.
> >>     
> >
> > "The same" means that they will use the same ioport space/address.
> > If they use the different ioport space/address, they will be regarded as
> > the different IPMI device.
> >
> >   
> >>> If the two mechanisms will detect the same IPMI interface, I agree with
> >>> what you are concerned.  Do you have an idea/thought to set up the
> >>> relationship between ACPI and IPMI interface? In order to enable that
> >>> AML code can access the IPMI, it should know which IPMI interface will
> >>> be accessed and create the corresponding user interface. If ACPI
> >>> mechanism will fail to register the IPMI interface, maybe it is
> >>> difficult to create the correct user interface.
> >>>       
> >> Well, right now if you change the ordering then the PCI interface will 
> >> never be exposed. It would be preferable to only expose the ACPI 
> >> interface as a user-visible device if there's no prior device - if there 
> >> is, I think the ideal solution would be for it to be an in-kernel only 
> >> device without a corresponding UI.
> >>     
> >
> > Sorry that I don't explain it clearly. The concept of "user interface"
> > in IPMI interface is only a channel that can be used to communicate with
> > the IPMI controller. It has no relationship with whether the IPMI
> > interface should be exposed to user space. If one driver wants to
> > communicate with one IPMI interface, we should create one "user
> > interface" firstly and send the corresponding IPMI message by using the
> > "user interface".
> >
> > If one IPMI interface(controller) is already detected by PCI mechanism,
> > then ACPI will fail to detect the same IPMI interface. In such case it
> > is difficult for ACPI to know which IPMI interface should be accessed
> > when the ACPI AML code need to communicate with the IPMI interface.
> >   
> This may all be true, but the IPMI specification clearly gives the 
> detection order.  It's not a good idea to deviate from that without a 
> very good reason.  I'm not sure this is a good enough reason.

Sorry that I don't pay attention to the discovery order. I relook at the
IPMI spec and find that I am wrong.

> 
> Also, the bulk of this code clearly has nothing to do with the system 
> interface itself and should be in its own file.  And is there any reason 
> to tie this to the SMI code, anyway?  There are plenty of systems with 
> IPMI and ACPI that use I2C or serial ports.  Can they not use this ACPI 
> function (even though their drivers are not in the mainstream kernel)?

My first thought is to put the ACPI-IPMI opregion handler into ACPI
subsystem. But Bjorn suggests that it can be put into the smi code. Then
I follow his suggestion.

OK. I will rewrite the code and don't tie the ACPI-IPMI opregion handler
to the smi code.
    
> 
> Can you look and see if there is some other way to detect the ACPI 
> function on a BMC with some other mechanism?  I think that would be 
> better all around.  If it's the same BMC, the I can't imagine it matters 
> if you send the messages via the PCI-detected or ACPI-detected mechanisms.

OK. I will think about it again and try to figure out one solution that
identify the same BMC via PCI-detected or ACPI-detected and avoids
adjusting the discovery order. 

Thanks for your idea.


> 
> -corey

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  reply	other threads:[~2010-06-10  2:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-06-07  9:27 [PATCH -v6 0/2] IPMI: Install the ACPI IPMI opregion yakui.zhao
2010-06-07  9:27 ` [PATCH -v6 1/2] IPMI: Install the IPMI space handler to enable ACPI to access the BMC controller yakui.zhao
2010-06-07  9:27   ` [PATCH -v6 2/2] IPMI: use ACPI detection mechanism firstly to detect IPMI system interface yakui.zhao
2010-06-07 12:52     ` Matthew Garrett
2010-06-08  1:28       ` ykzhao
2010-06-08  1:34         ` Matthew Garrett
2010-06-08  5:10           ` ykzhao
2010-06-09  3:02             ` Myron Stowe
2010-06-09 13:08             ` Corey Minyard
2010-06-10  2:34               ` ykzhao [this message]
2010-06-10  3:12                 ` Corey Minyard

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1276137295.4564.22.camel@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=yakui.zhao@intel.com \
    --cc=bjorn.helgaas@hp.com \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=minyard@acm.org \
    --cc=mjg59@srcf.ucam.org \
    --cc=myron.stowe@hp.com \
    --cc=openipmi-developer@lists.sourceforge.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).