[Skiboot] [PATCH 1/2] ipmi/opal: Provide ipmi_dequeue_msg() wrapper and invoke it on completion

Neelesh Gupta neelegup at linux.vnet.ibm.com
Sat Jun 27 14:47:16 AEST 2015

Hi Alistair,

On 06/26/2015 12:46 PM, Alistair Popple wrote:
> Hi,
> On Fri, 26 Jun 2015 12:11:38 Neelesh Gupta wrote:
> <snip>
>> Why should client forget doing it ? If it does so, then of course
>> programming error
>> and should be fixed.
> Yes, but there are no circumstances that I know of in which the client should
> not dequeue the message so why introduce the possibility of these types of
> errors?

May be client wants to do something different with ipmi_cmd_done() -> 
case, like giving a 'retry'... but my point was more from the interface 
point of view that
looked nicer to me..

>> In line with, when client does alloc(), it has to free() and when it
>> does queue_msg(),
>> it should be doing dequeue_msg() after completion or whenever it thinks
>> doing so..
>> IMO backend should not decide when to dequeue the message.
>> Moreover, backend may want to do more that just list_del() in
>> dequeue_msg() ..
>> like updating the state or number of outstanding requests etc.. that all
>> can nicely
>> be exposed though an interface.
> Why can't you do that with the current interface? You can just call
> ipmi_cmd_done() to notify the client and once that returns the backend can
> update whatever flags, etc. it needs...
>>> I agree that there is currently no API to dequeue an ipmi message (mainly
>>> because no one has needed it yet) but it should just be a thin wrapper in
>>> core/ipmi.c that calls backend->dequeue_msg().
>> I think that's what I added as part of this patch in core/ipmi.c
> Yes, that bit is fine and should be submitted as a separate patch adding just
> that.

It contradicts.. in one hand backend dequeing the message its own, on 
the other
hand providing a client interface to dequeue the message ...
so we should rather delete the existing dequeue_msg() callback for the 
sake of
client not having any impression of dequeuing the message and that will 
be taken
care by all the backend drivers..


> Regards,
> Alistair
>> Thanks,
>> Neelesh.
>>> - Alistair
>>> On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 22:40:32 Neelesh Gupta wrote:

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/skiboot/attachments/20150627/b261b057/attachment.html>

More information about the Skiboot mailing list