Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 03 Apr 2008 16:30:18 -0800 Carol Hebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> Hi, >> >> This reverse enumeration scheme is actually different from how the ipmi >> driver has worked in the past. The BMCs in multinode systems were >> historically named by the ipmi driver in the order in which they were >> probed. As such, current multinode users are expecting ipmi0 to >> reference the BMC in their first node, ipmi1 to reference the BMC in >> their second node, etc. as was always the case in the past. Without >> this patch, they will unknowingly be addressing the wrong BMC. This >> could conceivably cause operations to be erroneously executed that could >> result in data loss, etc. >> > > In which kernel version did this behavioural change occur? > > (this is a hard way to write a changelog!) > The change occurred in 2.6.14, when the DMI scanning was moved out of the IPMI driver and into the DMI code. So it's been a while.
But the trouble is, no one cared since no one had more than one IPMI controller in a system. But now IBM has come up with the machines with a boatload of them. As far as I know, that IBM machine is the only one that will care. IMHO, the best way to handle this is to use udev to properly name the devices. That was not an option for Carol, though. And having them in the opposite order of the firmware violates the principle of least surprise. So I went ahead and took the patch. -corey ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace _______________________________________________ Openipmi-developer mailing list Openipmi-developer@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openipmi-developer
