Hi Justin,
> Hi Ben,
>
> I have similar fix locally with different approach as the command handler may
> have some expectation for those byes.
> We can use NCSI_PKT_CMD_OEM handler as it only copies data based on the
> payload length.
Great! Yes I was thinking the same, we just need some way to take data payload
sent from netlink message and sent it over NC-SI.
>
> diff --git a/net/ncsi/ncsi-cmd.c b/net/ncsi/ncsi-cmd.c index 5c3fad8..3b01f65
> 100644
> --- a/net/ncsi/ncsi-cmd.c
> +++ b/net/ncsi/ncsi-cmd.c
> @@ -309,14 +309,19 @@ static struct ncsi_request *ncsi_alloc_command(struct
> ncsi_cmd_arg *nca)
>
> int ncsi_xmit_cmd(struct ncsi_cmd_arg *nca) {
> + struct ncsi_cmd_handler *nch = NULL;
> struct ncsi_request *nr;
> + unsigned char type;
> struct ethhdr *eh;
> - struct ncsi_cmd_handler *nch = NULL;
> int i, ret;
>
> + if (nca->req_flags == NCSI_REQ_FLAG_NETLINK_DRIVEN)
> + type = NCSI_PKT_CMD_OEM;
> + else
> + type = nca->type;
> /* Search for the handler */
> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(ncsi_cmd_handlers); i++) {
> - if (ncsi_cmd_handlers[i].type == nca->type) {
> + if (ncsi_cmd_handlers[i].type == type) {
> if (ncsi_cmd_handlers[i].handler)
> nch = &ncsi_cmd_handlers[i];
> else
>
So in this case NCSI_PKT_CMD_OEM would be the default handler for all NC-SI
command over netlink (standard and OEM), correct?
Should we rename this to something like NCSI_PKT_CMD_GENERIC for clarity
perhaps? Do you plan to upstream this patch?
Also do you have local patch to support NCSI_PKT_CMD_PLDM and the PLDM over
NC-SI commands defined here
(https://www.dmtf.org/sites/default/files/NC-SI_1.2_PLDM_Support_over_RBT_Commands_Proposal.pdf)?
If not I can send my local changes - but I think we can use the same
NCSI_PKT_CMD_OEM handler to transport PLDM payload over NC-SI.
What do you think?
(CC Deepak as I think once this is in place we can use pldmtool to send basic
PLDM payloads over NC-SI)
Regards,
-Ben
