IPMI implementation of Get Device ID command
benjaminfair at google.com
Tue Aug 25 03:31:42 AEST 2020
On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 04:58, TOM JOSEPH <tomjose at linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> 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?
That approach sounds good to me.
> 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 The implementation of the code is obsolete, as it was based on an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