From: Jiaqing Zhao <jiaqing.zhao@linux.intel.com>
To: Paul Fertser <fercerpav@gmail.com>
Cc: Samuel Mendoza-Jonas <sam@mendozajonas.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/ncsi: Add Intel OS2BMC OEM command
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2022 16:06:10 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <dbf54143-b514-5155-ac2a-9f934e9dd8bc@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YyNIPjNX9MCI3zkK@home.paul.comp>
On 2022-09-15 23:43, Paul Fertser wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 10:12:06AM +0800, Jiaqing Zhao wrote:
>> On 2022-09-09 15:43, Paul Fertser wrote:
>>> On Fri, Sep 09, 2022 at 03:34:53PM +0800, Jiaqing Zhao wrote:
>>>>> Can you please outline some particular use cases for this feature?
>>>>>
>>>> It enables access between host and BMC when BMC shares the network connection
>>>> with host using NCSI, like accessing BMC via HTTP or SSH from host.
>>>
>>> Why having a compile time kernel option here more appropriate than
>>> just running something like "/usr/bin/ncsi-netlink --package 0
>>> --channel 0 --index 3 --oem-payload 00000157200001" (this example uses
>>> another OEM command) on BMC userspace startup?
>>>
>>
>> Using ncsi-netlink is one way, but the package and channel id is undetermined
>> as it is selected at runtime. Calling the netlink command on a nonexistent
>> package/channel may lead to kernel panic.
>
> That sounds like a bug all right. If you can reproduce, it's likely
> the fix is reasonably easy, please consider doing it.
It cannot be reproduced stably and varies on NICs, I'm still investigating it,
it might be some NIC firmware issue.
>> Why I prefer the kernel option is that it applies the config to all ncsi
>> devices by default when setting up them. This reduces the effort and keeps
>> compatibility. Lots of things in current ncsi kernel driver can be done via
>> commands from userspace, but I think it is not a good idea to have a driver
>> resides on both kernel and userspace.
>
> How should the developer decide whether to enable this compile-time
> option for a platform or not? If it's always nice to have why not
> add the code unconditionally? And if not, are you sure kernel compile
> time is the right decision point? So far I get an impression a sysfs
> runtime knob would be more useful.
Disabling Host-BMC traffic ensures the isolation between Host network and BMC's
management network, some developers/vendors may prefer disable it for security
concerns. Though having a runtime knob in sysfs would be useful, setting the
default behavior in kernel config is also useful from my point.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-19 8:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-09 2:57 [PATCH] net/ncsi: Add Intel OS2BMC OEM command Jiaqing Zhao
2022-09-09 5:59 ` Paul Fertser
2022-09-09 7:34 ` Jiaqing Zhao
2022-09-09 7:43 ` Paul Fertser
2022-09-13 2:12 ` Jiaqing Zhao
2022-09-13 13:35 ` Sam Mendoza-Jonas
2022-09-14 1:10 ` Jiaqing Zhao
2022-09-15 15:43 ` Paul Fertser
2022-09-19 8:06 ` Jiaqing Zhao [this message]
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=dbf54143-b514-5155-ac2a-9f934e9dd8bc@linux.intel.com \
--to=jiaqing.zhao@linux.intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=fercerpav@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=sam@mendozajonas.com \
/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