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=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 BB6EBC433DB for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 19:24:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 37CAD23B1A for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 19:24:15 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 37CAD23B1A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DGvPn3gqczDrj1 for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2021 06:24:13 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (no SPF record) smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com (client-ip=192.55.52.120; helo=mga04.intel.com; envelope-from=vernon.mauery@linux.intel.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DGvLW4KDrzDrg8 for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2021 06:21:23 +1100 (AEDT) IronPort-SDR: 0az93Jei6T4lk5jWMdCDfs1NIuX3Bwg2rjjqFw/jorDdGW6YFhx6JibssRLGc6EMtTjjLOLD6i p+hwLkkWA1Ug== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9864"; a="175830826" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,347,1602572400"; d="scan'208";a="175830826" Received: from orsmga006.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.51]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Jan 2021 09:38:07 -0800 IronPort-SDR: sZlSDJdldZrQ+7GelpbugBselpjY7QS/QJc/0tzRN2rsmiyX6a3mXupuJntWbkwABpWLFW0vut FfCkwWOdnDFA== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,347,1602572400"; d="scan'208";a="352568143" Received: from vmauery-desk.jf.intel.com (HELO mauery.jf.intel.com) ([10.7.150.62]) by orsmga006-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Jan 2021 09:38:07 -0800 Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2021 09:38:05 -0800 From: Vernon Mauery To: Ed Tanous Subject: Re: Intel-ipmi-oem repo Message-ID: <20210114173805.GB45289@mauery.jf.intel.com> References: <20210114143909.jf3vbk7zhxp3iguv@thinkpad.fuzziesquirrel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Willy Tu , OpenBMC Maillist , chunhui.jia@linux.intel.com, Brad Bishop , apparao.puli@linux.intel.com, Vijay Khemka Errors-To: openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "openbmc" On 14-Jan-2021 08:38 AM, Ed Tanous wrote: >On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 6:40 AM Brad Bishop >wrote: > >> On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 06:54:14PM -0800, Willy Tu wrote: >> >> Team, >> >> Intel-ipmi-oem should be broken and 2 parts, genric and oem specific.= I >> >see several functionality in this repo like sensors and storage commands >> >are generic enough to be used by other platform who is using entity >> >manager. So I feel that we should have these functionalities to be moved >> to >> >a separate common repo which can be used by everyone and this repo can >> only >> >contain Intel OEM specific IPMI command support. >> >> >> >> My 2 cents =F0=9F=98=8A >> > >> >Hi All, >> > >> >I guess I'll start working on this if no one has any objection to it. >> >> Awesome! >> >> >As mentioned in the beginning of the thread. The plan is to break down = the >> >intel-ipmi-oem repo into two parts. >> >- True OEM at Intel >> >- Dynamic Sensor stacks (new repo) >> >> Why is dynamic sensor stacks a new repo? I would like to see this done >> in the existing ipmid repo. If the default implementations there today >> are undesired, I'd be fine with seeing those moved to the >> openpower-ipmi-oem repository. >> > >I only suggested a new repo originally because today it's a separate repo, >and the long ago patch to add it directly to ipmid got the feedback that >was too different than the existing to go there. If we're now ok with it >going in IPMID, I'd prefer that as well. > >Would people prefer it to be a package config on IPMID to select between >the two implementations? I don't have a problem with a package config to select sensor=20 implementations. > >> >> FWIW I would like to make use of dynamic SDR on my new systems (I work >> for IBM) but I still have to maintain support for Witherspoon, which >> relies on the old fixed & hardcoded sensor identifiers. I would say that if IBM is the only company using the sensor=20 implementation that is currently in ipmid, it would be best to move it=20 to the IBM OEM layer. But it is difficult in a project this size who is=20 using what. So leaving it in ipmid for now is fine. --Vernon