Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 14:09:14 -0700 From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Doug Ambrisko <ambrisko@ambrisko.com> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bge IPMI patch final review Message-ID: <45008A7A.9040503@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <200609072023.k87KNsmR040569@ambrisko.com> References: <200609072023.k87KNsmR040569@ambrisko.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Doug Ambrisko wrote: >Julian Elischer writes: >| Doug Ambrisko wrote: >| >| >I'd like to commit my final bge version of the IPMI patch to keep IPMI >| >working when FreeBSD attaches and also when the NIC is downed. >| >I also have patches for the bce to do the same that I sent to David. >| >This has various reviews and testing in the wild. I want to give >| >a heads up since there have been changes in the bge driver recently. >| >I'd like to not hold off on this anymore. >| >| code looks good but could you add a bunch of comments explaining the >| handshake and how this works. (be verbose please) > >You tell me and we'll both know :-( It's inspired from Linux and >that doesn't explain it. Their doc. doesn't say much except do this >then don't touch the PHY which is what Linux does. Via emperical >evidence I found that if I was careful I could talk to the PHY initially. >Now if you want a more interesting thing to look at then try the bce version. >There is absolutely no doc's. that I could find. > > > you still know more about it than anyone else.. at least comment your assumptions so that others that follow have a change to build on what you have done. >About the only thing I can say is that we have to play with is the >BGE_MODECTL_STACKUP that says the OS driver is running. I could mention >that. > > well that could be documented. >If we really had insight into a potential firmware handshake then we could >try to co-operate and access the PHY in a safe way to watch link state >changes. Via emperical means I could not figure anything out :-( It's >even worse that we can't tell if IPMI was actually enabled or not since >some implementations required a reset before talking to the chip >to see what it was doing :-( I don't see any clues in the kernel.org >or BroadCom's driver. > >Currently it does more then what Linux and Solaris do :-) > > so the comments could at least say what you think is going on (and all that you have said above) so that others can understand more. > >Doug A. > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?45008A7A.9040503>