* phosphor-isolation @ 2019-09-19 17:33 James Feist 2019-09-20 3:47 ` phosphor-isolation Andrew Jeffery 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: James Feist @ 2019-09-19 17:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: OpenBMC Maillist, Andrew Jeffery I enabled phosphor-isolation on my system and noticed that kcs no longer worked afterwards. Commenting out this section: https://github.com/openbmc/meta-phosphor/blob/a1cee09419cb1467c3d2b7bf996b40089f0d06f4/aspeed-layer/recipes-bsp/u-boot/files/0001-aspeed-Disable-unnecessary-features.patch#L230 + /* iLPC2AHB */ + val = readl(AST_SCU_BASE + AST_SCU_HW_STRAP1); + val |= SCU_HW_STRAP_LPC_DEC_SUPER_IO; + writel(val, AST_SCU_BASE + AST_SCU_HW_STRAP1); Seems to make KCS work again. Do we need this part set? If so, should we create a phosphor-isolation-kcs and phosphor-isolation-bt? Thanks -James ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: phosphor-isolation 2019-09-19 17:33 phosphor-isolation James Feist @ 2019-09-20 3:47 ` Andrew Jeffery 2019-09-20 15:55 ` phosphor-isolation James Feist 2019-09-20 16:20 ` phosphor-isolation Milton Miller II 0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Andrew Jeffery @ 2019-09-20 3:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: James Feist, OpenBMC Maillist; +Cc: Ryan Chen On Fri, 20 Sep 2019, at 03:03, James Feist wrote: > I enabled phosphor-isolation on my system and noticed that kcs no longer > worked afterwards. Commenting out this section: > > https://github.com/openbmc/meta-phosphor/blob/a1cee09419cb1467c3d2b7bf996b40089f0d06f4/aspeed-layer/recipes-bsp/u-boot/files/0001-aspeed-Disable-unnecessary-features.patch#L230 > > + /* iLPC2AHB */ > + val = readl(AST_SCU_BASE + AST_SCU_HW_STRAP1); > + val |= SCU_HW_STRAP_LPC_DEC_SUPER_IO; > + writel(val, AST_SCU_BASE + AST_SCU_HW_STRAP1); > > > Seems to make KCS work again. That is an unexpected result. Have you asked ASPEED about it? I've added Ryan to Cc. I must admit I didn't test the patch with systems that use KCS because OpenPOWER exclusively uses BT for IPMI (though we're starting to exploit the KCS interfaces for an LPC MCTP binding). Having said that, the systems that we're testing our LPC MCTP binding on would have this patch applied, so presumably we're not seeing the same effect there. They're 2500-based systems, is that what you're testing with? > Do we need this part set? If so, should we > create a phosphor-isolation-kcs and phosphor-isolation-bt? I hope not, given that leaving the SuperIO decoding enable allows the host to (slowly) scrape BMC memory (or if iLPC2AHB writes are allowed, open faster backdoors). We should root-cause the issue before exploring this path. Andrew ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: phosphor-isolation 2019-09-20 3:47 ` phosphor-isolation Andrew Jeffery @ 2019-09-20 15:55 ` James Feist 2019-09-20 16:20 ` phosphor-isolation Milton Miller II 1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: James Feist @ 2019-09-20 15:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Jeffery, OpenBMC Maillist; +Cc: Ryan Chen On 9/19/19 8:47 PM, Andrew Jeffery wrote: > > > On Fri, 20 Sep 2019, at 03:03, James Feist wrote: >> I enabled phosphor-isolation on my system and noticed that kcs no longer >> worked afterwards. Commenting out this section: >> >> https://github.com/openbmc/meta-phosphor/blob/a1cee09419cb1467c3d2b7bf996b40089f0d06f4/aspeed-layer/recipes-bsp/u-boot/files/0001-aspeed-Disable-unnecessary-features.patch#L230 >> >> + /* iLPC2AHB */ >> + val = readl(AST_SCU_BASE + AST_SCU_HW_STRAP1); >> + val |= SCU_HW_STRAP_LPC_DEC_SUPER_IO; >> + writel(val, AST_SCU_BASE + AST_SCU_HW_STRAP1); >> >> >> Seems to make KCS work again. > > That is an unexpected result. Have you asked ASPEED about it? I've added > Ryan to Cc. I must admit I didn't test the patch with systems that use KCS > because OpenPOWER exclusively uses BT for IPMI (though we're starting > to exploit the KCS interfaces for an LPC MCTP binding). > > Having said that, the systems that we're testing our LPC MCTP binding on > would have this patch applied, so presumably we're not seeing the same > effect there. They're 2500-based systems, is that what you're testing with? Yes I am. > >> Do we need this part set? If so, should we >> create a phosphor-isolation-kcs and phosphor-isolation-bt? > > I hope not, given that leaving the SuperIO decoding enable allows the > host to (slowly) scrape BMC memory (or if iLPC2AHB writes are allowed, > open faster backdoors). We should root-cause the issue before exploring > this path. > > Andrew > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* RE: phosphor-isolation 2019-09-20 3:47 ` phosphor-isolation Andrew Jeffery 2019-09-20 15:55 ` phosphor-isolation James Feist @ 2019-09-20 16:20 ` Milton Miller II 2019-09-20 18:16 ` phosphor-isolation James Feist 2019-09-20 19:51 ` phosphor-isolation Milton Miller II 1 sibling, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Milton Miller II @ 2019-09-20 16:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: James Feist; +Cc: Andrew Jeffery, OpenBMC Maillist, Ryan Chen On September 20, 2019, around 10:56AM in some timezone, James Feist wrote: >On 9/19/19 8:47 PM, Andrew Jeffery wrote: >> On Fri, 20 Sep 2019, at 03:03, James Feist wrote: >>> I enabled phosphor-isolation on my system and noticed that kcs no >>>longer >>> worked afterwards. Commenting out this section: >>> >>> >>> >>> + /* iLPC2AHB */ >>> + val = readl(AST_SCU_BASE + AST_SCU_HW_STRAP1); >>> + val |= SCU_HW_STRAP_LPC_DEC_SUPER_IO; >>> + writel(val, AST_SCU_BASE + AST_SCU_HW_STRAP1); >>> >>> >>> Seems to make KCS work again. That configuration is disabling superio decoding, which means the host will no longer be able to configure the superio hardware on the LPC bus. >> >> That is an unexpected result. Have you asked ASPEED about it? I've >> added >> Ryan to Cc. I must admit I didn't test the patch with systems that >> use KCS >> because OpenPOWER exclusively uses BT for IPMI (though we're >> starting >> to exploit the KCS interfaces for an LPC MCTP binding). >> >> Having said that, the systems that we're testing our LPC MCTP >> binding on >> would have this patch applied, so presumably we're not seeing the >> same >> effect there. They're 2500-based systems, is that what you're >> testing with? > >Yes I am. > As an outside observer without hardware, can you check: (1) Did you check from the OS or just from a BIOS inventory? (2) Is there code to enable the KCS peripheral from the bmc (3) Will the host try to use the KCS even though it can not find the superio to choose the port and interrupt? >>> >>> Do we need this part set? If so, should we >>> create a phosphor-isolation-kcs and phosphor-isolation-bt? >> >> I hope not, given that leaving the SuperIO decoding enable allows >the >> host to (slowly) scrape BMC memory (or if iLPC2AHB writes are >> allowed, >> open faster backdoors). We should root-cause the issue before >> exploring this path. >> >> Andrew ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: phosphor-isolation 2019-09-20 16:20 ` phosphor-isolation Milton Miller II @ 2019-09-20 18:16 ` James Feist 2019-09-21 0:34 ` phosphor-isolation Ryan Chen 2019-09-20 19:51 ` phosphor-isolation Milton Miller II 1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: James Feist @ 2019-09-20 18:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Milton Miller II; +Cc: Andrew Jeffery, OpenBMC Maillist, Ryan Chen On 9/20/19 9:20 AM, Milton Miller II wrote: > On September 20, 2019, around 10:56AM in some timezone, James Feist wrote: >> On 9/19/19 8:47 PM, Andrew Jeffery wrote: >>> On Fri, 20 Sep 2019, at 03:03, James Feist wrote: >>>> I enabled phosphor-isolation on my system and noticed that kcs no >>>> longer >>>> worked afterwards. Commenting out this section: >>>> >>>> > >>>> >>>> + /* iLPC2AHB */ >>>> + val = readl(AST_SCU_BASE + AST_SCU_HW_STRAP1); >>>> + val |= SCU_HW_STRAP_LPC_DEC_SUPER_IO; >>>> + writel(val, AST_SCU_BASE + AST_SCU_HW_STRAP1); >>>> >>>> >>>> Seems to make KCS work again. > > That configuration is disabling superio decoding, which means the host > will no longer be able to configure the superio hardware on the LPC bus. > >>> >>> That is an unexpected result. Have you asked ASPEED about it? I've >>> added >>> Ryan to Cc. I must admit I didn't test the patch with systems that >>> use KCS >>> because OpenPOWER exclusively uses BT for IPMI (though we're >>> starting >>> to exploit the KCS interfaces for an LPC MCTP binding). >>> >>> Having said that, the systems that we're testing our LPC MCTP >>> binding on >>> would have this patch applied, so presumably we're not seeing the >>> same >>> effect there. They're 2500-based systems, is that what you're >>> testing with? >> >> Yes I am. >> > > As an outside observer without hardware, can you check: > > (1) Did you check from the OS or just from a BIOS inventory? Attempting to send ipmi commands from uefi/linux stopped working. Linux driver on host reported issues communicating to bmc. > > (2) Is there code to enable the KCS peripheral from the bmc There is a driver and kcsbridged. > > (3) Will the host try to use the KCS even though it can > not find the superio to choose the port and interrupt? Yes. > > > > > >>>> >>>> Do we need this part set? If so, should we >>>> create a phosphor-isolation-kcs and phosphor-isolation-bt? >>> >>> I hope not, given that leaving the SuperIO decoding enable allows >> the >>> host to (slowly) scrape BMC memory (or if iLPC2AHB writes are >>> allowed, >>> open faster backdoors). We should root-cause the issue before >>> exploring this path. >>> >>> Andrew > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* RE: phosphor-isolation 2019-09-20 18:16 ` phosphor-isolation James Feist @ 2019-09-21 0:34 ` Ryan Chen 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Ryan Chen @ 2019-09-21 0:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: James Feist, Milton Miller II; +Cc: Andrew Jeffery, OpenBMC Maillist Hello James, This patch is just enable LPC decode for 0x2e/0x4e. also not effect KCS. Could you check the SCU0c[8] disable or not? Ryan -----Original Message----- From: James Feist [mailto:james.feist@linux.intel.com] Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2019 2:17 AM To: Milton Miller II <miltonm@us.ibm.com> Cc: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@aj.id.au>; OpenBMC Maillist <openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org>; Ryan Chen <ryan_chen@aspeedtech.com> Subject: Re: phosphor-isolation On 9/20/19 9:20 AM, Milton Miller II wrote: > On September 20, 2019, around 10:56AM in some timezone, James Feist wrote: >> On 9/19/19 8:47 PM, Andrew Jeffery wrote: >>> On Fri, 20 Sep 2019, at 03:03, James Feist wrote: >>>> I enabled phosphor-isolation on my system and noticed that kcs no >>>> longer worked afterwards. Commenting out this section: >>>> >>>> > >>>> >>>> + /* iLPC2AHB */ >>>> + val = readl(AST_SCU_BASE + AST_SCU_HW_STRAP1); >>>> + val |= SCU_HW_STRAP_LPC_DEC_SUPER_IO; >>>> + writel(val, AST_SCU_BASE + AST_SCU_HW_STRAP1); >>>> >>>> >>>> Seems to make KCS work again. > > That configuration is disabling superio decoding, which means the host > will no longer be able to configure the superio hardware on the LPC bus. > >>> >>> That is an unexpected result. Have you asked ASPEED about it? I've >>> added Ryan to Cc. I must admit I didn't test the patch with systems >>> that use KCS because OpenPOWER exclusively uses BT for IPMI (though >>> we're starting to exploit the KCS interfaces for an LPC MCTP >>> binding). >>> >>> Having said that, the systems that we're testing our LPC MCTP >>> binding on would have this patch applied, so presumably we're not >>> seeing the same effect there. They're 2500-based systems, is that >>> what you're testing with? >> >> Yes I am. >> > > As an outside observer without hardware, can you check: > > (1) Did you check from the OS or just from a BIOS inventory? Attempting to send ipmi commands from uefi/linux stopped working. Linux driver on host reported issues communicating to bmc. > > (2) Is there code to enable the KCS peripheral from the bmc There is a driver and kcsbridged. > > (3) Will the host try to use the KCS even though it can > not find the superio to choose the port and interrupt? Yes. > > > > > >>>> >>>> Do we need this part set? If so, should we create a >>>> phosphor-isolation-kcs and phosphor-isolation-bt? >>> >>> I hope not, given that leaving the SuperIO decoding enable allows >> the >>> host to (slowly) scrape BMC memory (or if iLPC2AHB writes are >>> allowed, open faster backdoors). We should root-cause the issue >>> before exploring this path. >>> >>> Andrew > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* RE: phosphor-isolation 2019-09-20 16:20 ` phosphor-isolation Milton Miller II 2019-09-20 18:16 ` phosphor-isolation James Feist @ 2019-09-20 19:51 ` Milton Miller II 1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Milton Miller II @ 2019-09-20 19:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: James Feist; +Cc: Andrew Jeffery, OpenBMC Maillist, Ryan Chen Around 09/20/2019 01:16PM in some timezone James Feist wrote:>On 9/20/19 9:20 AM, Milton Miller II wrote: >> On September 20, 2019, around 10:56AM in some timezone, James Feist wrote: >>> On 9/19/19 8:47 PM, Andrew Jeffery wrote: >>>> On Fri, 20 Sep 2019, at 03:03, James Feist wrote: >>>>> I enabled phosphor-isolation on my system and noticed that kcs >>>>> >no >>>>> longer >>>>> worked afterwards. Commenting out this section: >>>>> >>>>> >> >>>>> >>>>> + /* iLPC2AHB */ >>>>> + val = readl(AST_SCU_BASE + AST_SCU_HW_STRAP1); >>>>> + val |= SCU_HW_STRAP_LPC_DEC_SUPER_IO; >>>>> + writel(val, AST_SCU_BASE + AST_SCU_HW_STRAP1); >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Seems to make KCS work again. >> >> That configuration is disabling superio decoding, which means the >host >> will no longer be able to configure the superio hardware on the LPC >bus. >> >>>> >>>> That is an unexpected result. Have you asked ASPEED about it? >>>> I've >>>> added >>>> Ryan to Cc. I must admit I didn't test the patch with systems >>>> that >>>> use KCS >>>> because OpenPOWER exclusively uses BT for IPMI (though we're >>>> starting >>>> to exploit the KCS interfaces for an LPC MCTP binding). >>>> >>>> Having said that, the systems that we're testing our LPC MCTP >>>> binding on >>>> would have this patch applied, so presumably we're not seeing the >>>> same >>>> effect there. They're 2500-based systems, is that what you're >>>> testing with? >>> >>> Yes I am. >>> >> >> As an outside observer without hardware, can you check: >> >> (1) Did you check from the OS or just from a BIOS inventory? > >Attempting to send ipmi commands from uefi/linux stopped working. >Linux >driver on host reported issues communicating to bmc. > >> >> (2) Is there code to enable the KCS peripheral from the bmc > >There is a driver and kcsbridged. Those are probably drivers to respond to data sent over the bridge. I was looking more to "is the KCS peripherial enabled on the LPC bus at the expected address?" If you add mem.devmem=y [1] to the kernel command line you can use devmem at runtime to reverse that bit via /dev/mem and then use an sio configuration tool from the host to query how its configured. There is probably another way to do it from the bmc side but I don't know where to start looking (probably somewhere in the lpc space). [1] https://github.com/openbmc/linux/blob/707b68f43a8cc94fe5dcc4e35dad778828ca9cc9/drivers/char/mem.c#L921 >> >> (3) Will the host try to use the KCS even though it can >> not find the superio to choose the port and interrupt? > >Yes. > >> >> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> Do we need this part set? If so, should we >>>>> create a phosphor-isolation-kcs and phosphor-isolation-bt? >>>> >>>> I hope not, given that leaving the SuperIO decoding enable allows >>>> the >>>> host to (slowly) scrape BMC memory (or if iLPC2AHB writes are >>>> allowed, >>>> open faster backdoors). We should root-cause the issue before >>>> exploring this path. >>>> >>>> Andrew milton ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-09-21 0:36 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2019-09-19 17:33 phosphor-isolation James Feist 2019-09-20 3:47 ` phosphor-isolation Andrew Jeffery 2019-09-20 15:55 ` phosphor-isolation James Feist 2019-09-20 16:20 ` phosphor-isolation Milton Miller II 2019-09-20 18:16 ` phosphor-isolation James Feist 2019-09-21 0:34 ` phosphor-isolation Ryan Chen 2019-09-20 19:51 ` phosphor-isolation Milton Miller II
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.