From: Pierre S. <psa...@es...> - 2008-10-24 17:07:37
|
Shuah, 5.x is the PICMG Extension version for MicroTCA MCs and is not used for MMC modules (It's 4.x for them). Anton is right, IPMI Direct plugin doesn't talk directly to MMCs but only to IPMCs. Pierre > -----Original Message----- > From: Anton Pak [mailto:ant...@pi...] > Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 18:12 > To: sh...@fc... > Cc: ope...@li... > Subject: Re: [Openhpi-devel] [PATCH] IPMI Direct patch to support PICMG > Extension version 4.0 > > Shuah, > > class cIpmiMc represents ATCA IPMC. > The code in ipmi_mc.cpp works only with for IPMC - IPMB-0 address, FRU 0. > AMC Module is visible to ipmidirect plug-in as - IPMB-0 address, FRU ID != > 0. > So the instance of cIpmiMc class is never created to represent AMC Module. > So the code for PICMG Ext = 4.x does not executed anyway. > > BTW, I have searched for "eIpmiCmdSendMsg" in plugins/ipmidirect directory > and found no explicit bridging cases. > My understanding is: IPMI Direct is not using IPMB-0 -> IPMB-L bridging > explicitly. > Carrier does it implicitly. > > P.S. My copy of AMC.0 R2.0 spec(November 15, 2006) says about extesion = > 4.1. > > Anton Pak > > > On Fri, 24 Oct 2008 19:57:22 +0400, Shuah Khan <shu...@hp...> wrote: > > > Anton, > > > > AMC Carrier is bridging the traffic using IPMI-L and tell the plug-in > > about the subsidiary AMCs giving their IPMB-L addresses using which the > > plug-in can directly talk to the AMCs. When these AMCs respond to Get > > Picmg properties command they respond with PICMG Extension version 4.0. > > I checked the ATC PICMG Spec from 2006 and it does indicate 4.0 is a > > valid version. I think I am dealing with AMCs that are not at 5.0 yet. > > My thinking is that this is safe change. Your thoughts. > > > > Thanks, > > -- Shuah > > > > On Fri, 2008-10-24 at 19:47 +0400, Anton Pak wrote: > >> Shuah, > >> > >> I see. > >> Is IPMI Direct uses bridging to IPMB-L? > >> I guessed plug-in just worked with subsidiary FRUs of AMC Carrier, but > >> not > >> with > >> MMCs directly. > >> > >> Anton Pak > >> > >> > >> On Fri, 24 Oct 2008 19:46:29 +0400, Shuah Khan <shu...@hp...> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > In the case I am dealing with, AMC Carrier bridges the traffic to > >> > subsidiary FRUs which are the AMC modules. There modules are > >> responding > >> > with PICMG Extension version 4.0 (4 being the major and 0 being the > >> > minor). > >> > > >> > Thanks, > >> > -- Shuah > >> > > >> > On Fri, 2008-10-24 at 19:35 +0400, Anton Pak wrote: > >> >> Hello! > >> >> > >> >> Is there any system with AMC module that is visible to OpenHPI as > >> IPMC, > >> >> not as subsidiary FRU of > >> >> AMC Carrier or uTCA Carrier Manager? > >> >> > >> >> Anton Pak > >> >> > >> >> On Fri, 24 Oct 2008 19:30:50 +0400, Shuah Khan <shu...@hp...> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > All, > >> >> > > >> >> > Currently IPMI Direct plug-in recognizes modules that support > PICMG > >> >> > Extension version 5.0. However I am coming across AMC modules that > >> >> > support PICMG Extension version 4.0. I would like to enhance the > >> >> plug-in > >> >> > to recognize modules that support 4.0 as well. Here is the patch > >> that > >> >> > does that. Please review and let me know if you have any comments > >> >> and/or > >> >> > concerns. If I don't hear any, I will commit the patch early next > >> >> week. > >> >> > > >> >> > Thanks, > >> >> > >> >> > >> > > >> > >> > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's > challenge > Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great > prizes > Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the > world > http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ > _______________________________________________ > Openhpi-devel mailing list > Ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openhpi-devel |