答复: [External] Re: Clarify some questions about host tool (burn_my_bmc)

[Andrew MS1 Peng <pengms1@lenovo.com>]

-----邮件原件-----
发件人: Patrick Venture <venture@google.com> 
发送时间: 2019年8月13日 22:34
收件人: Andrew MS1 Peng <pengms1@lenovo.com>
抄送: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org
主题: [External] Re: Clarify some questions about host tool (burn_my_bmc)

On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 2:43 AM Andrew MS1 Peng <pengms1@lenovo.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Patrick,
>
>
>
> 1.      It took about 4 minutes and 30 seconds for BIOS update with 64MB rom image. Could we extension the pollstatus time from 100 sec to 300 sec to get the final status?

I'm curious why it's harmful to check more frequently?

		I showed some source code of helper.cpp as below, the checking status total time was 100 sec (5*20) but it was not enough for bios update and therefore I would like to extension the time from 100 sec to 300 sec.

				  	static constexpr auto verificationSleep = 5s;
    				ipmi_flash::ActionStatus result = ipmi_flash::ActionStatus::unknown;

   					try
    				{
        				static constexpr int commandAttempts = 20;
       					 int attempts = 0;
						............................................

>
> 2.      If user can choose to preserve BMC configuration (rw area) or BIOS configuration when upgrade firmware, do you have any suggestions with regards to preserve configuration implementation or could the host tool support to send a parameter to support it?

Since one of the design goals was to keep the interface from the host simple, and mostly agonistic to what was taking place, consideration wasn't given for a mechanism for adding extra parameters.  We're in a similar boat where we want a mechanism for changing the level of upgrade, so I'll go over the design today at some point and see whether we can do it agnostically.

>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Andrew
>
>