Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757384AbYGHWUV (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:20:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754692AbYGHWUJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:20:09 -0400 Received: from g5t0007.atlanta.hp.com ([15.192.0.44]:3085 "EHLO g5t0007.atlanta.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753975AbYGHWUI convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:20:08 -0400 From: "Altobelli, David" To: Pavel Machek CC: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "greg@kroah.com" Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 22:19:18 +0000 Subject: RE: [PATCH][resubmit] HP iLO driver Thread-Topic: [PATCH][resubmit] HP iLO driver Thread-Index: AcjhRHdRb/PBFYPmTTqlQQyD+GbKWwAAJkCA Message-ID: References: <20080623160052.GA7616@ldl.fc.hp.com> <20080627191458.GA10872@ucw.cz> <20080707160658.GB1794@elf.ucw.cz> <20080708072152.GD1761@elf.ucw.cz> <20080708073818.GA14245@elf.ucw.cz> <20080708215002.GA18195@elf.ucw.cz> In-Reply-To: <20080708215002.GA18195@elf.ucw.cz> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Whitelist: TRUE Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1587 Lines: 37 Pavel Machek wrote: > Could you provide the list of commands (at least) so we can be more > concrete? Unfortunately, I don't believe that I can. We reviewed this internally, and the question of documentation was raised. The hardware teams did not approve disseminating the ABI. To be clear, we understand what we are doing by releasing the driver as GPLv2, the actual functionality of communicating with iLO was okayed for release. But releasing the specifics of what we can send was not approved. > Yes, I believe we do want to have 30 commands it kernel, because it > will allow same userland to work on HP machines, AMD machines, etc... We sell AMD :) > (I assume management processors have pretty similar functionality > accross vendors, right?) I can't speak for other vendors. >> It seems much cleaner to keep the kernel interface simple and opaque >> (ie read/write), and handle the details of the commands in user >> space. From my limited understanding, I thought that was a common >> goal here: move what you can to userspace. > > We are not _that_ extreme. Yes, keep stuff in userspace is important, > but "hide hardware differences" is more important goal. That seems like a larger question/goal. Giving users some consistent interfaces to do stuff would be nice, but I'd really like to handle this driver on its own. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/