IPMI implementation of Get Device ID command

TOM JOSEPH tomjose at linux.vnet.ibm.com
Mon Aug 24 21:57:55 AEST 2020


Thanks for the response on this. Every company seems to have a different 
version scheme and the parsing might not fit into upstream 
implementation of the Get Device ID command.

My proposal is to add major and minor version to the dev_id.json and 
this can be populated in the meta-xxx layer (something like this 
If the format of the VERSION_ID does not match the master tag format, 
then major and minor version will be picked from the dev_id.json. With 
this approach every company can share the upstream implementation of the 
command. Thoughts?


On 15-08-2020 04:41, Mauery, Vernon wrote:
> On 14-Aug-2020 11:04 PM, TOM JOSEPH wrote:
>> Hello,
>> We have an implementation of this command 
>> https://github.com/openbmc/phosphor-host-ipmid/blob/master/apphandler.cpp#L571 
>> . The current version of the code derives the major and minor 
>> firmware revision from the VERSION_ID field, and the auxiliary 
>> firmware revision is picked from dev_id.json. The auxiliary firmware 
>> revision is populated at build time 
>> https://github.com/openbmc/openbmc/blob/master/meta-ibm/recipes-phosphor/ipmi/phosphor-ipmi-config.bbappend.
>> The implementation of the code is obsolete, as it was based on an 
>> earlier format. The current format of VERSION_ID for example is, 
>> 2.9.0-dev-609-g56f86d23c. There is already a WIP patch to fix this 
>> for the master tag format 
>> https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/phosphor-host-ipmid/+/33893. 
>> <https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/phosphor-host-ipmid/+/33893> 
>> IBM tagging format is different from the tag format of master builds. 
>> One choice is to have the major and minor version added to the 
>> dev_id.json and if the format of VERSION_ID does not match the master 
>> tag format,  pick from the json.
>> How are other companies converting their arbitrary tag formats to 
>> IPMI firmware revision fields? Does every company maintain their own 
>> downstream implementation of this command?
> We have a two-hash version scheme (one for openbmc, the other for the 
> downstream meta-intel layer) that looks something like 
> wht-0.2-3-gab3500-38384ac. We override the Get Device ID command
> https://github.com/openbmc/intel-ipmi-oem/blob/master/src/appcommands.cpp#L200 
> to expose part of both of those hashes in the aux bytes. But to get 
> the full version string, we use redfish.
>> Is a common code possible for converting arbitrary tag formats to 
>> IPMI firmware revision fields?
> Not that I am aware of. I think this leads to lots of string parsing.
> --Vernon

More information about the openbmc mailing list