* 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 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 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 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 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: 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 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