Hello, On 09/12/2016 10:33 PM, Corey Minyard wrote: > On 09/12/2016 02:15 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> On Monday, September 12, 2016 1:55:40 PM CEST Corey Minyard wrote: >>> On 09/02/2016 08:22 AM, Cédric Le Goater wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> Adding Corey in cc: . I guess I should have done that in the first place. >>> Yes, probably so. I've been travelling and didn't see it on the mailing >>> lists until now. >>> >>> There is already a BT driver in the kernel, in drivers/char/ipmi, why >>> won't that work? >> The new driver is the host side (running on the BMC), the existing one >> is the client (running on the PC). >> >> Arnd > > Ok, that's not really clear from the documentation or the Kconfig. > In the IPMI spec the "host" side is the computer side, not the BMC > side. Like: > > 11.6.1 BT Host Interface Registers > The Host BT interface provides an independent set of registers and > interrupts to allow the Host driver to > communicate with the baseboard management controller without > conflicting with the O/S ACPI driver. > > In light of that, this should probably be named the bt-bmc driver. > > I haven't reviewed this in detail, but I'm ok with putting it in > drivers/char/ipmi. The state machine part looks reasonably > generic. The configuration part isn't, but that could be split > out later if necessary. > > The biggest thing I don't like is the byte at a time interfaces > from userspace. That seems fairly inefficient if the system > does extra work for each userspace access. IIRC some > systems do and some don't. What about the ioctl to send an SMS ATN event to the host ? Is that ok for you ? Thanks, C. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
