[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090427173021.GA7078@auslistsprd01.us.dell.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 12:30:21 -0500
From: Matt Domsch <Matt_Domsch@...l.com>
To: Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
Cc: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
Michael E Brown <Michael_E_Brown@...l.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: Class device namespaces
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 05:30:05PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 08:01:22 -0500, Matt Domsch wrote:
> > I'll note there is a second implementation that uses dell_rbu, and
> > that is included in each and every "Dell Update Package" (aka DUP)
> > BIOS update posted on support.dell.com for every Dell PowerEdge server
> > for the past several years. Because the updater and they BIOS payload
> > are packaged in the same package, a change which would require
> > changing that updater will result in requiring Dell to spin and
> > re-release hundreds of DUPs, which would not go over well... Thank
> > you for being careful not to change the interface capriciously - it
> > could have a huge impact on us.
>
> I'll be careful, but you have to admit that duplicating utility code
> like this is poor engineering from Dell :( I don't want to think of the
> mess it will be if you ever have to fix a critical bug in that code.
Yes, this is well-understood, and steps are in process to address this
model. http://linux.dell.com/firmware-tools is the preferred model,
with split inventory/execution components from firmware payloads.
Thanks,
Matt
--
Matt Domsch
Linux Technology Strategist, Dell Office of the CTO
linux.dell.com & www.dell.com/linux
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists