Proposal for removing legacy code update services

Proposal for removing legacy code update services

[Lei YU]

Hi All,

With 3ba97559e, OpenBMC supports PNOR code update by
org.open_power.Software.Host.Updater.service, with the steps described in
[host-code-update.md][1]

And before that OpenBMC already supports BMC code update by
xyz.openbmc_project.Software.BMC.Updater.service as well, with the steps
described in [ubi-code-update.md][2]

So it's time to remove the legacy services that could be replaced:
- org.openbmc.control.BmcFlash.service
- org.openbmc.control.Flash.service
- org.openbmc.managers.Download.service

What do you think?

Thanks!

[1]: https://github.com/openbmc/docs/blob/master/code-update/host-code-update.md
[2]: https://github.com/openbmc/docs/blob/master/code-update/ubi-code-update.md

Re: Proposal for removing legacy code update services

[Andrew Geissler]

On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 10:48 PM Lei YU <mine260309@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> With 3ba97559e, OpenBMC supports PNOR code update by
> org.open_power.Software.Host.Updater.service, with the steps described in
> [host-code-update.md][1]
>
> And before that OpenBMC already supports BMC code update by
> xyz.openbmc_project.Software.BMC.Updater.service as well, with the steps
> described in [ubi-code-update.md][2]
>
> So it's time to remove the legacy services that could be replaced:
> - org.openbmc.control.BmcFlash.service
> - org.openbmc.control.Flash.service
> - org.openbmc.managers.Download.service
>
> What do you think?

Sounds good to me! Get some more python applications out of our images and
makes it easier to have standard CI tests for all machines.

> Thanks!
>
> [1]: https://github.com/openbmc/docs/blob/master/code-update/host-code-update.md
> [2]: https://github.com/openbmc/docs/blob/master/code-update/ubi-code-update.md

Re: Proposal for removing legacy code update services

[Lei YU]

The services are being removed at:
https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/meta-phosphor/+/21208

The related docs are being updated at:
https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/docs/+/21209
https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/docs/+/21210
https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/docs/+/21211

Leave comments there if you have any concerns.


On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 11:33 PM Andrew Geissler <geissonator@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 10:48 PM Lei YU <mine260309@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > With 3ba97559e, OpenBMC supports PNOR code update by
> > org.open_power.Software.Host.Updater.service, with the steps described in
> > [host-code-update.md][1]
> >
> > And before that OpenBMC already supports BMC code update by
> > xyz.openbmc_project.Software.BMC.Updater.service as well, with the steps
> > described in [ubi-code-update.md][2]
> >
> > So it's time to remove the legacy services that could be replaced:
> > - org.openbmc.control.BmcFlash.service
> > - org.openbmc.control.Flash.service
> > - org.openbmc.managers.Download.service
> >
> > What do you think?
>
> Sounds good to me! Get some more python applications out of our images and
> makes it easier to have standard CI tests for all machines.
>
> > Thanks!
> >
> > [1]: https://github.com/openbmc/docs/blob/master/code-update/host-code-update.md
> > [2]: https://github.com/openbmc/docs/blob/master/code-update/ubi-code-update.md

Re: Proposal for removing legacy code update services

[Joel Stanley]

On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 at 03:49, Lei YU <mine260309@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> With 3ba97559e, OpenBMC supports PNOR code update by
> org.open_power.Software.Host.Updater.service, with the steps described in
> [host-code-update.md][1]
>
> And before that OpenBMC already supports BMC code update by
> xyz.openbmc_project.Software.BMC.Updater.service as well, with the steps
> described in [ubi-code-update.md][2]
>
> So it's time to remove the legacy services that could be replaced:
> - org.openbmc.control.BmcFlash.service
> - org.openbmc.control.Flash.service
> - org.openbmc.managers.Download.service
>
> What do you think?

To clarify, this only affects the updating of the PNOR/BIOS, and not the BMC?

Cheers,

Joel

Re: Proposal for removing legacy code update services

[Lei YU]

> To clarify, this only affects the updating of the PNOR/BIOS, and not the BMC?

No, this affects BMC update as well.
With https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/meta-phosphor/+/21208,
the APIs in /org/openbmc/control/flash/bmc will be dropped.

BMC code update shall use the APIs in /xyz/openbmc_project/software instead.

Re: Proposal for removing legacy code update services

[Joel Stanley]

On Wed, 8 May 2019 at 08:48, Lei YU <mine260309@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > To clarify, this only affects the updating of the PNOR/BIOS, and not the BMC?
>
> No, this affects BMC update as well.
> With https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/meta-phosphor/+/21208,
> the APIs in /org/openbmc/control/flash/bmc will be dropped.
>
> BMC code update shall use the APIs in /xyz/openbmc_project/software instead.

Okay.

Does it affect the on-device update method of putting images in
/run/initramfs and rebooting?

Re: Proposal for removing legacy code update services

[Lei YU]

> Does it affect the on-device update method of putting images in
> /run/initramfs and rebooting?

No, it doesn't.
You could still update code by putting images in /run/initramfs and reboot.

Re: Proposal for removing legacy code update services

[Joel Stanley]

On Wed, 8 May 2019 at 08:58, Lei YU <mine260309@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Does it affect the on-device update method of putting images in
> > /run/initramfs and rebooting?
>
> No, it doesn't.
> You could still update code by putting images in /run/initramfs and reboot.

Great! I checked op-test, and it is already using the
/xyz/openbmc_project/software API.

+1 from me.

Cheers,

Joel