IPMI Set LAN Configuration Parameters

[Patrick Venture]

I personally have found this non-standard implementation a bit
unpleasant, as it requires using a different command to basically
flush it.  I am planning to implement it such that setting in progress
before and complete after is how it all gets flushed instead of a
timeout, since that approach reads more correct given the
specification.  And really it's just about literally calling a
subroutine to flush everything when the in_progress bit is set to
completed, and removing the code from "access on"

If you're interested to do what I've just described, I don't think
you'll get any push-back.

Patrick

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 9:14 AM, Dave Cobbley
<david.j.cobbley at linux.intel.com> wrote:
> I noticed that when using ipmitool lan set <channel> <parameter>, the
> openbmc stack does not apply the settings. This seems like a non-standard
> implementation. While using ipmitool as the standard is not quite correct,
> customers do expect it to work.
>
> After sending any sort of lan set command with ipmitool, the changes don't
> appear to stick and this message shows up in the journal:
>     "Use Set Channel Access command to apply"
>
> I know IPMI 2.0 is a little ambiguous about implementation specifics, but I
> believe the intention was to utilize the "Set In Progress" bit (Parameter 0)
> while doing work, and use "Set Complete" when you are finished to flush the
> changes.
>
> To work around ipmitool constantly setting and unsetting the "Set In
> Progress" bit in between every parameter applied, some BMC stacks accumulate
> network changes over a period of time and apply after a timeout - this is
> also compatible with ipmitool's non-standard use of the "Set In Progress"
> bit.
>
>
> Is there a plan to circle back and change this functionality to work with
> ipmitool in the future?
>
> Thanks,
> -Dave Cobbley
>