[PATCH RFC 1/2] powerpc/pseries: papr-vpd char driver for VPD retrieval
Michal Suchánek
msuchanek at suse.de
Thu Aug 31 20:38:11 AEST 2023
On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 03:34:37PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Michal Suchánek <msuchanek at suse.de> writes:
> > Hello,
> >
> > thanks for working on this.
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 04:33:39PM -0500, Nathan Lynch via B4 Relay wrote:
> >> From: Nathan Lynch <nathanl at linux.ibm.com>
> >>
> >> PowerVM LPARs may retrieve Vital Product Data (VPD) for system
> >> components using the ibm,get-vpd RTAS function.
> >>
> >> We can expose this to user space with a /dev/papr-vpd character
> >> device, where the programming model is:
> >>
> >> struct papr_location_code plc = { .str = "", }; /* obtain all VPD */
> >> int devfd = open("/dev/papr-vpd", O_WRONLY);
> >> int vpdfd = ioctl(devfd, PAPR_VPD_CREATE_HANDLE, &plc);
> >> size_t size = lseek(vpdfd, 0, SEEK_END);
> >> char *buf = malloc(size);
> >> pread(devfd, buf, size, 0);
> >>
> >> When a file descriptor is obtained from ioctl(PAPR_VPD_CREATE_HANDLE),
> >> the file contains the result of a complete ibm,get-vpd sequence. The
> >
> > Could this be somewhat less obfuscated?
> >
> > What the caller wants is the result of "ibm,get-vpd", which is a
> > well-known string identifier of the rtas call.
>
> Not really. What the caller wants is *the VPD*. Currently that's done
> by calling the RTAS "ibm,get-vpd" function, but that could change in
> future. There's RTAS calls that have been replaced with a "version 2" in
> the past, that could happen here too. Or the RTAS call could be replaced
> by a hypercall (though unlikely).
>
> But hopefully if the underlying mechanism changed the kernel would be
> able to hide that detail behind this new API, and users would not need
> to change at all.
>
> > Yet this identifier is never passed in. Instead we have this new
> > PAPR_VPD_CREATE_HANDLE. This is a completely new identifier, specific to
> > this call only as is the /dev/papr-vpd device name, another new
> > identifier.
> >
> > Maybe the interface could provide a way to specify the service name?
> >
> >> file contents are immutable from the POV of user space. To get a new
> >> view of VPD, clients must create a new handle.
> >
> > Which is basically the same as creating a file descriptor with open().
>
> Sort of. But much cleaner becuase you don't need to create a file in the
> filesystem and tell userspace how to find it.
You very much do. There is the /dev/papr-vpd and PAPR_VPD_CREATE_HANDLE
which userspace has to know about, the PAPR_VPD_CREATE_HANDLE is not
even possible to find at all.
Thanks
Michal
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list