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=-8.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham 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 CF6A4C43331 for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 20:29:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D48621925 for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 20:29:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="c5yUTYdu" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727002AbfKLU3h (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Nov 2019 15:29:37 -0500 Received: from mail-oi1-f195.google.com ([209.85.167.195]:40882 "EHLO mail-oi1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726959AbfKLU3h (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Nov 2019 15:29:37 -0500 Received: by mail-oi1-f195.google.com with SMTP id 22so16097341oip.7 for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 12:29:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:reply-to:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=nuSxtpboCRFRoH7ONR/ButKqpEu2VWZcgPYrZ3xx478=; b=c5yUTYduIUiho00H0b3vhjtRjB+ajbeo7u2wmpJPSMI0+GG55FNytcQPRmRnWnyFj1 m432tYV8/llpTRhPJfog/sSGDxnrAMUqkwR9Zqq+MNfLAtXO56t75b8042lQmynQEPUQ P66WVNVMDWdc5oalPToJYo0bl83h34bPblu7b9DkYCExgOHck3JuCFrqAIJm5P/otTux Uus+Bili5xOtFHdymFj7uqdzv/GtqofxZY5yfPdUTg/eg8NRGUZD9t5M+O/2ST7Pfqiy Wd6X4pUb8PBIxJoVziUV1cNNzAp49YvHBtA/neT73vXlgc9I9FOL2Znm/AbvtWgo0S+K jScw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :reply-to:references:mime-version:content-disposition :content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=nuSxtpboCRFRoH7ONR/ButKqpEu2VWZcgPYrZ3xx478=; b=pt/PuIErGAADXhJBYim+MQ/tM3oFZm/Zsih296Eg/W9pLHRwEWcecrtsLwRb3I2N5j M5LOHz90DW1yOtD6sQ3WNgvSH3ElYXnxWoXqWPcPqMn/UVY7XZVPve6ywitSuTQeZm3J 7OQ2ablXJv92Nso4ZLkZazIgscdDW/2L+Ggtj8B1sVC6xSYGTxUcWvw68ZbcgBT4csHp 0x3YXrzEh2jYrg4BdO0v1JUKz34YzADjWUOBlFbErFXIy1fHDTVWI9NRxSRx/spBCMz+ 3Iz0JOwjJnQMuLuzjYeWHeIlAQ2MLCZ3T0fA9sncaCvsnfASIktrDW1jUod4L2uTtvkO izZA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWEgBMlRNdIMKkeABZ/Cm2//IFVYPBOPJeQ9qcmiE48g+4c04lL 2HJZvEuIipbBH+ZS4d0DlQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzkAt+1k/8BZCXeyArXDOhGImLjCdeMesIH8HcGa0Km475jeAHh7ADW67WFyJhYu8RqDGgvZQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:181:: with SMTP id w1mr751465oic.109.1573590575994; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 12:29:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from serve.minyard.net (serve.minyard.net. [2001:470:b8f6:1b::1]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k6sm2775908otr.35.2019.11.12.12.29.35 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 12 Nov 2019 12:29:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from minyard.net (unknown [192.168.27.180]) by serve.minyard.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4A03118016D; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 20:29:33 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 14:29:32 -0600 From: Corey Minyard To: Vijay Khemka Cc: Arnd Bergmann , Greg Kroah-Hartman , "openipmi-developer@lists.sourceforge.net" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "cminyard@mvista.com" , "asmaa@mellanox.com" , "joel@jms.id.au" , "linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org" , Sai Dasari Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drivers: ipmi: Modify max length of IPMB packet Message-ID: <20191112202932.GJ2882@minyard.net> Reply-To: minyard@acm.org References: <20191112023610.3644314-1-vijaykhemka@fb.com> <20191112023610.3644314-2-vijaykhemka@fb.com> <20191112124845.GE2882@minyard.net> <7BC487D6-6ACA-46CE-A751-8367FEDEE647@fb.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <7BC487D6-6ACA-46CE-A751-8367FEDEE647@fb.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 07:56:34PM +0000, Vijay Khemka wrote: > > > On 11/12/19, 4:48 AM, "Corey Minyard" wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 06:36:10PM -0800, Vijay Khemka wrote: > > As per IPMB specification, maximum packet size supported is 255, > > modified Max length to 240 from 128 to accommodate more data. > > I couldn't find this in the IPMB specification. > > IIRC, the maximum on I2C is 32 byts, and table 6-9 in the IPMI spec, > under "IPMB Output" states: The IPMB standard message length is > specified as 32 bytes, maximum, including slave address. > > We are using IPMI OEM messages and our response size is around 150 bytes > For some of responses. That's why I had set it to 240 bytes. Hmm. Well, that is a pretty significant violation of the spec, but there's nothing hard in the protocol that prohibits it, I guess. If Asmaa is ok with this, I'm ok with it, too. -corey > > I'm not sure where 128 came from, but maybe it should be reduced to 31. > > -corey > > > > > Signed-off-by: Vijay Khemka > > --- > > drivers/char/ipmi/ipmb_dev_int.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmb_dev_int.c b/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmb_dev_int.c > > index 2419b9a928b2..7f9198bbce96 100644 > > --- a/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmb_dev_int.c > > +++ b/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmb_dev_int.c > > @@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ > > #include > > #include > > > > -#define MAX_MSG_LEN 128 > > +#define MAX_MSG_LEN 240 > > #define IPMB_REQUEST_LEN_MIN 7 > > #define NETFN_RSP_BIT_MASK 0x4 > > #define REQUEST_QUEUE_MAX_LEN 256 > > -- > > 2.17.1 > > > >