* Re: [PATCH] PATCH: IPMI driver
[not found] <200301090332.h093WML05981@hera.kernel.org>
@ 2003-01-09 16:44 ` Dave Jones
2003-01-09 18:06 ` Alan Cox
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Dave Jones @ 2003-01-09 16:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linux Kernel Mailing List; +Cc: alan
> ChangeSet 1.980, 2003/01/08 22:23:15-02:00, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk
>
> [PATCH] PATCH: IPMI driver
>
> This has been in -ac for a short while. Linus accepted and merged the
> same IPMI support into 2.5.54 so now it can move into 2.4 IMHO
>
> Documentation/IPMI.txt | 341 ++++++
> drivers/char/Makefile | 5
> drivers/char/ipmi/Makefile | 20
> drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_devintf.c | 532 ++++++++++
> drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_kcs_intf.c | 1235 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_kcs_sm.c | 467 +++++++++
> drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_kcs_sm.h | 70 +
> drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_msghandler.c | 1811 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_watchdog.c | 971 +++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/ipmi.h | 516 ++++++++++
> include/linux/ipmi_msgdefs.h | 58 +
> include/linux/ipmi_smi.h | 144 ++
> 12 files changed, 6170 insertions(+)
Either I'm blind, or none of those files exist in Linus' tree
looking at current bitkeeper snapshot.
Dave
--
| Dave Jones. http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
| SuSE Labs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] PATCH: IPMI driver
2003-01-09 18:06 ` Alan Cox
@ 2003-01-09 17:22 ` Dave Jones
2003-01-09 18:12 ` Alan Cox
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Dave Jones @ 2003-01-09 17:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alan Cox; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 06:06:34PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> Arghhh I was told Linus accepted it, and my tree indexer found "IPMI" so
> decided it was present too. (Only the i2c definitions apparently).
Shouldn't cause any problems in 2.4 anyways should it ?
After all, its 'just another driver'.
> Oh well, it should be in 2.5
Added to the queue of bits from the 2.4 changesets list that I'm
intending to push to Linus soon.
Dave
--
| Dave Jones. http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
| SuSE Labs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] PATCH: IPMI driver
2003-01-09 16:44 ` [PATCH] PATCH: IPMI driver Dave Jones
@ 2003-01-09 18:06 ` Alan Cox
2003-01-09 17:22 ` Dave Jones
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Alan Cox @ 2003-01-09 18:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Jones; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Thu, 2003-01-09 at 16:44, Dave Jones wrote:
>
> Either I'm blind, or none of those files exist in Linus' tree
> looking at current bitkeeper snapshot.
Arghhh I was told Linus accepted it, and my tree indexer found "IPMI" so
decided it was present too. (Only the i2c definitions apparently). Oh
well, it should be in 2.5
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] PATCH: IPMI driver
2003-01-09 17:22 ` Dave Jones
@ 2003-01-09 18:12 ` Alan Cox
2003-01-09 19:16 ` Corey Minyard
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Alan Cox @ 2003-01-09 18:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Jones; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Thu, 2003-01-09 at 17:22, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 06:06:34PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > Arghhh I was told Linus accepted it, and my tree indexer found "IPMI" so
> > decided it was present too. (Only the i2c definitions apparently).
>
> Shouldn't cause any problems in 2.4 anyways should it ?
> After all, its 'just another driver'.
>
> > Oh well, it should be in 2.5
>
> Added to the queue of bits from the 2.4 changesets list that I'm
> intending to push to Linus soon.
Pull the 2.5 port from openipmi.sourceforge.net saves you doing the port
yourself.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] PATCH: IPMI driver
2003-01-09 18:12 ` Alan Cox
@ 2003-01-09 19:16 ` Corey Minyard
2003-01-09 19:20 ` Dave Jones
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Corey Minyard @ 2003-01-09 19:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alan Cox; +Cc: Dave Jones, Linux Kernel Mailing List
Alan Cox wrote:
>On Thu, 2003-01-09 at 17:22, Dave Jones wrote:
>
>
>>On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 06:06:34PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
>>
>> > Arghhh I was told Linus accepted it, and my tree indexer found "IPMI" so
>> > decided it was present too. (Only the i2c definitions apparently).
>>
>>Shouldn't cause any problems in 2.4 anyways should it ?
>>After all, its 'just another driver'.
>>
>> > Oh well, it should be in 2.5
>>
>>Added to the queue of bits from the 2.4 changesets list that I'm
>>intending to push to Linus soon.
>>
>>
>
>Pull the 2.5 port from openipmi.sourceforge.net saves you doing the port
>yourself.
>
Definately pull the 2.5 port from there, as there are some differences
between the 2.4 and 2.5 versions.
-Corey
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] PATCH: IPMI driver
2003-01-09 19:16 ` Corey Minyard
@ 2003-01-09 19:20 ` Dave Jones
2003-01-09 19:37 ` Corey Minyard
2003-01-09 20:17 ` Alan Cox
0 siblings, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Dave Jones @ 2003-01-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Corey Minyard; +Cc: Alan Cox, Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 01:16:29PM -0600, Corey Minyard wrote:
> >Pull the 2.5 port from openipmi.sourceforge.net saves you doing the port
> >yourself.
> >
> Definately pull the 2.5 port from there, as there are some differences
> between the 2.4 and 2.5 versions.
I had a quick skim through the patch.
Is the handling of jiffies wraps done correctly ? It doesn't
look like it...
time_diff = ((jiffies_now - kcs_info->last_timeout_jiffies)
Dave
--
| Dave Jones. http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] PATCH: IPMI driver
2003-01-09 20:17 ` Alan Cox
@ 2003-01-09 19:37 ` Dave Jones
2003-01-09 20:42 ` Jeff Garzik
1 sibling, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Dave Jones @ 2003-01-09 19:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alan Cox; +Cc: Corey Minyard, Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 08:17:57PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-01-09 at 19:20, Dave Jones wrote:
> > time_diff = ((jiffies_now - kcs_info->last_timeout_jiffies)
>
> Thats valid for unsigned maths
> 0x00000001 - 0xFFFFFFFF = 0x00000002
Doh, I've made this mistake before.. Thanks for clarifying.
Dave
--
| Dave Jones. http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] PATCH: IPMI driver
2003-01-09 19:20 ` Dave Jones
@ 2003-01-09 19:37 ` Corey Minyard
2003-01-09 20:17 ` Alan Cox
1 sibling, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Corey Minyard @ 2003-01-09 19:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Jones; +Cc: Alan Cox, Linux Kernel Mailing List
Dave Jones wrote:
>On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 01:16:29PM -0600, Corey Minyard wrote:
>
> > >Pull the 2.5 port from openipmi.sourceforge.net saves you doing the port
> > >yourself.
> > >
> > Definately pull the 2.5 port from there, as there are some differences
> > between the 2.4 and 2.5 versions.
>
>I had a quick skim through the patch.
>Is the handling of jiffies wraps done correctly ? It doesn't
>look like it...
>
>time_diff = ((jiffies_now - kcs_info->last_timeout_jiffies)
>
> Dave
>
I don't understand why that wouldn't work. Those are both unsigned long
values. Assuming twos complement, the time difference could be correct,
even in a wraparound case (unless a very large number of jiffies has
transpired, but that will never be the case here).
Am I missing something here?
-Corey
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] PATCH: IPMI driver
2003-01-09 19:20 ` Dave Jones
2003-01-09 19:37 ` Corey Minyard
@ 2003-01-09 20:17 ` Alan Cox
2003-01-09 19:37 ` Dave Jones
2003-01-09 20:42 ` Jeff Garzik
1 sibling, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Alan Cox @ 2003-01-09 20:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Jones; +Cc: Corey Minyard, Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Thu, 2003-01-09 at 19:20, Dave Jones wrote:
> time_diff = ((jiffies_now - kcs_info->last_timeout_jiffies)
Thats valid for unsigned maths
0x00000001 - 0xFFFFFFFF = 0x00000002
Alan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] PATCH: IPMI driver
2003-01-09 20:17 ` Alan Cox
2003-01-09 19:37 ` Dave Jones
@ 2003-01-09 20:42 ` Jeff Garzik
1 sibling, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Garzik @ 2003-01-09 20:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alan Cox; +Cc: Dave Jones, Corey Minyard, Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 08:17:57PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-01-09 at 19:20, Dave Jones wrote:
> > time_diff = ((jiffies_now - kcs_info->last_timeout_jiffies)
>
> Thats valid for unsigned maths
> 0x00000001 - 0xFFFFFFFF = 0x00000002
Just as a general note (not to Alan), this often appears in ethernet
drivers, in their RX and TX producer/consumer ring counters... so don't
be surprised if you see this logic elsewhere in the kernel, too.
Jeff
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-01-09 20:33 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <200301090332.h093WML05981@hera.kernel.org>
2003-01-09 16:44 ` [PATCH] PATCH: IPMI driver Dave Jones
2003-01-09 18:06 ` Alan Cox
2003-01-09 17:22 ` Dave Jones
2003-01-09 18:12 ` Alan Cox
2003-01-09 19:16 ` Corey Minyard
2003-01-09 19:20 ` Dave Jones
2003-01-09 19:37 ` Corey Minyard
2003-01-09 20:17 ` Alan Cox
2003-01-09 19:37 ` Dave Jones
2003-01-09 20:42 ` Jeff Garzik
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox