linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2] Change ACPI IPMI support to "default y"

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 20 Feb 2014 21:00:48 +0000
From:	Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@...ula.com>
To:	"rja@....com" <rja@....com>
CC:	"lenb@...nel.org" <lenb@...nel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"minyard@....org" <minyard@....org>,
	"rjw@...ysocki.net" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] Change ACPI IPMI support to "default y"

On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:59 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 08:46:04PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:40 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
> > 
> > > This is also a problem for systems with functional BMCs.  Our
> > > large cluster systems do all IPMI traffic (monitoring) through
> > > a system controller back door.  We do not want the kernel
> > > doing IPMI commands on those systems.
> > 
> > Why not?
> 
> Because some customers want to use cpu cycles for their
> application and let the ipmi monitoring go on through
> the system controller network.

Why is it generating any significant amount of CPU load? We're not
talking about a high-bandwidth interface here.

-- 
Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@...ula.com>