OpenBMC Image Management

[Chris Austen]

"openbmc" <openbmc-bounces+austenc=us.ibm.com at lists.ozlabs.org> wrote on
06/20/2017 09:38:40 AM:

> From: Adriana Kobylak <anoo at linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> To: Stewart Smith <stewart at linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: OpenBMC Maillist <openbmc at lists.ozlabs.org>
> Date: 06/20/2017 09:38 AM
> Subject: Re: OpenBMC Image Management
> Sent by: "openbmc" <openbmc-bounces+austenc=us.ibm.com at lists.ozlabs.org>
>
>
> > On Jun 19, 2017, at 12:44 AM, Stewart Smith
> <stewart at linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > Adriana Kobylak <anoo at linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
> >>> Why is there mboxbridge separate from phosphor-mboxd?
> >>
> >> Because the mboxbridge is being used by other companies as a reference
> >> to be able to implement the mailbox daemon in their own BMC firmware
> >> stack for other openpower systems, we didn’t want to “pollute” the
> >> repository with openbmc-specific and c++ implementation that could
> >> confuse them.
> >
> > Why are there OpenBMC specific things in mboxd?
> >
> > Why can't the reference implementation be used? What's deficient in it?
>
> For OpenBMC, we’re having the PNOR chip with a filesystem, so mboxd
> would read/write files instead of looking for the data at an offset
> in the chip. Nothing deficient with it, just a different
> implementation that needs to be handled.

I have been recommending that if you want to try OpenBMC on your system
(that is not running  OpenBMC now) that the BMC chip be swapped.  Does the
offset vs filesystem change force the PNOR flash image to be forever
changed too?

>
> >
> > --
> > Stewart Smith
> > OPAL Architect, IBM.
>
Chris Austen
POWER Systems Enablement Manager
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/openbmc/attachments/20170620/56f32223/attachment.html>