linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v1 0/4] ipmi_bmc: framework for IPMI on BMCs

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Mon, 14 Aug 2017 11:03:12 -0500
From:   Patrick Williams <patrick@...cx.xyz>
To:     Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>
Cc:     minyard@....org, benjaminfair@...gle.com, clg@...d.org,
        joel@....id.au, andrew@...id.au,
        openipmi-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net, openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v1 0/4] ipmi_bmc: framework for IPMI on BMCs

On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 08:52:57PM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> Currently, OpenBMC handles all IPMI message routing and handling in userland;
> the existing drivers simply provide a file interface for the hardware on the
> device. In this patchset, we propose a common file interface to be shared by all
> IPMI hardware interfaces, but also a framework for implementing handlers at the
> kernel level, similar to how the existing OpenIPMI framework supports both
> kernel users, as well as misc device file interface.

Brendan,

Can you expand on why this is a good thing from an OpenBMC perspective?
We have a pretty significant set of IPMI providers that run in the
userspace daemon(s) and I can't picture more than a very small subset
even being possible to run in kernel space without userspace assistance.
We also already have an implementation of a RMCP+ daemon that can, and
does, share most of its providers with the host-side daemon.

-- 
Patrick Williams

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)