Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 9 Jul 2008 08:15:09 -0700 (PDT) | From | Martin Knoblauch <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH][resubmit] HP iLO driver |
| |
----- Original Message ----
> From: "Altobelli, David" <david.altobelli@hp.com> > To: Martin Knoblauch <knobi@knobisoft.de>; Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz> > Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; "greg@kroah.com" <greg@kroah.com> > Sent: Wednesday, July 9, 2008 4:47:14 PM > Subject: RE: [PATCH][resubmit] HP iLO driver > > Martin Knoblauch wrote: > > Somehow I feel the need to step in, as I believe that this > > thread is really going in the wrong direction. > > > > It is true that David (or HP) definitely could have done a > > better job in describing why this driver is needed and what > > HP-Utilities are depending on it. This might have lead some > > people to misinterpret what ILO is about. > > I'm sorry about that. This driver is needed for tools like: > hponcfg, hpdiags, hp-snmp-agents, and iLO flash utilities. >
hponcfg - configuration hpdiags - ??? hp-snmp-agents - ??? Do they provide sensor information? iLO Flash - Firmware upgrade > > ILO (Q: does HP still sell RILOE boards and are they > > supporten by the driver?) is a command processor that allows > > RILOE cards are not sold any more, and are not supported by this driver. >
OK, so this is really Proliant and likely Blades only? No chance that this will show up elsewhere?
> > > > ILO can be configured either offline (server OS shut down), > > or via the external interfaces, or from a running OS via some > > HP provided utilities. For this a driver is needed, and that > > is what we are talking about. From my experience as an > > administrator of HP Proliant systems the only local uses for > > the *internal* ILO interface is to set-up the thing, and to > > do firmware upgrades. > > Yeah, those are most common. This driver will also surface data > through HPSMH or HPSIM, if the proper packages are installed. >
Hmm. I am a bit out of touch. What are they doing?
> > To obtain sensor data locally there are other ways, which do > > not need the ILO kernel driver (hplog together with hpasmd, > > which unfortunately are closed source). So , unless the > > HP-ILO driver is just a replacement of the old "cpqci" > > driver, there is no need to pester David on functionality. > > If, of course the HP-ILO driver is needed to get to the > > hpasm/hplog functionality (no driver was needed so far) the > > story might be different. But then HP should provide the > > specs for the Proliant sensor interface anyway and work > > together with the lm_sensors project. But that is a different story. > > This is a replacement for cpqci, which was released in the > "hprsm" package, and later replaced by the "hp-ilo" package. > The former package was not GPL, the latter is. > I rewrote the driver to make it (hopefully) more palatable, > in terms of both style and functionality.
I really believe that if the HP-ILO driver is only needed for configuration and FW upgrades, it is OK in the current state. I do not think that anybody really wants to write another hponcfg or iLO-flash.
But if it is also needed to obtain sensor information, your colleagues should really think about supporting the lm_sensors framework.
Cheers Martin
| |