D-bus model proposal for pay for access features
ratankgupta31 at gmail.com
Tue May 4 17:41:35 AEST 2021
Any comments on the below proposal?
On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 11:45 PM Ratan Gupta <ratankgupta31 at gmail.com>
> Hi All,
> I would like to introduce a dbus model proposal around pay for access features.Normally IBM system ships with more hardware than was purchased, which can be unlocked later.
> Features could be 1) AIX enabled/disabled
> 2) How many processors are enabled
> 3) How much memory is enabled
> *Proposed Model:*
> The model consists of following main entities:1 - licenses - these objects represents the features. There will be a license represnting
> feature(one is to one relation ship) and these objects have state - active, inactive, unknown, etc.
> These objects could implement the Delete interface for when a client wishes to disable the license/feature.
> 2 - manager - the manager object (distinct from freedesktop object manager) provides a method
> interface to create new license objects.
> *Alternate Dbus Model:*
> 1 - Licenses: these objects represent an agreement. These objects have an
> association to one or more features, and these objects have state - active,inactive, unknown, etc.
> These objects could implement the Delete interface for when a client wishes to disable the license.
> 2 - Features: these objects describe the features available.
> Feature objects would be static and implementation/platform defined. A BMC or host firmware update
> could potentially add or remove the available features exposed as dbus objects. At the moment the
> only feature attribute I can think of is a name and the feature status.
> 3 Manager - the manager object (distinct from freedesktop object manager)
> provides a method interface to create new license objects.
> The difference between two models areIn the alternate Dbus model we are keeping the feature Dbus object and the License have an associated features
> In the proposed model we are only keeping the license D-bus object which represent the feature.
> Flow would be as below with the proposed model -1/ Manager object would be having interface like upload (License activation key)
> 2/ On IBM systems we send this key to the host firmware which activates the features
> 3/ Host Firmware sends the activated feature list to the BMC
> 4/ BMC creates the licenses for the activated features
> I suspect an implementation of the above flow is highly IBM specific,
> but I hope some of you have some feedback that might enable some collaboration.
> If not - where should we put this application?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the openbmc