Switch up eth0 and eth1 to BMC shared and dedicated resp. ( Zaius )

Patrick Williams patrick at stwcx.xyz
Tue Jun 27 09:05:59 AEST 2017

On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 03:00:30PM +0930, Joel Stanley wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 2:33 AM, Adriana Kobylak <anoo at us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > From: Adi Gangidi
> > Sent: Friday, June 9, 2017 10:06 AM
> > To: anoo at us.ibm.com; Kenneth Wilke; Brad DeBauche; Chad Somerlot;
> > abarrera at us.ibm.com; ryan.dc.yu at foxconn.com; Rob Lippert
> > Subject: Switch up eth0 and eth1 to BMC shared and dedicated resp. ( Zaius )
> >
> > Hi Adriana /.  Ryan ( Foxconn )
> >
> > Right now on openBMC
> > BMC Shared      = eth0
> > BMC Dedicated = eth1
> >
> >
> > Instead, Is there a way we can make sure the BMC dedicated comes up as eth0
> > and BMC shared link comes up as eth1, in Zaius / Barreleye G2 ?
> >
> >
> > In how it works currently . you could have BMC dedicated be eth0 or eth1
> > depending upon the hardware config ( Whether or not Broadcom 5719A is popped
> > OR de-popped ) . That could confusing to support operators who don't
> > understand the nuances .
> >
> > If you guys are busy with other things to make the change  , can I have your
> > thoughts on if this can be changed ? I'm guessing this is a u-boot change .
> > Any thoughts on how we could make this change ourselves ?
> You can use a udev rule to ensure the devices are named as you expect.

Most Linux distros have moved away from 'ethN' style naming and to
"something else".  My laptop's network interfaces are named 'enp0s31f6'
and 'wlp4s0' for the ethernet and wireless interfaces respectively.


According to that, the default order of naming we should be getting is something
like this:

1. Names incorporating Firmware/BIOS provided index numbers for on-board devices (example: eno1)
2. Names incorporating Firmware/BIOS provided PCI Express hotplug slot index numbers (example: ens1)
3. Names incorporating physical/geographical location of the connector of the hardware (example: enp2s0)
4. Classic, unpredictable kernel-native ethX naming (example: eth0)

Any idea why we are ending up with #4?  Is this due to device tree
entries / naming?  It seems like using something like #3 would get well
defined and consistent names no matter which network interface is
enabled.  It should also, in theory, make all AST2400 chips arrive at
the same names for NC-SI vs direct PHY.

Patrick Williams
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/openbmc/attachments/20170626/13bcb510/attachment.sig>

More information about the openbmc mailing list