Shouldn't IPMI be using /sys instead /proc? I thought we're trying to cleanup /proc?
--------------- List: linux-kernel Subject: RE: [PATCH 2.6.11.6] Add power cycle to ipmi_poweroff module From: <Chris_Poblete () Dell ! com> Date: 2005-04-08 15:53:54 Message-ID: <D69989B48C25DB489BBB0207D0BF51F70262F423 () ausx2kmpc104 ! aus ! amer ! dell ! com> [Download message RAW] The message handler and si are already using /proc/ipmi/<intf_num>. The patch code simply reuse it. By the way, shouldn't we be using sysfs? As for separating from power_off, it just seem so simple to integrate the power cycle command into the power_off code. It could definitely be a separate module. Thanks, -Chris Poblete -----Original Message----- From: Corey Minyard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 08, 2005 10:35 AM To: Poblete, Chris Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.11.6] Add power cycle to ipmi_poweroff module [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Below is a patch to add "power cycle" functionality to the IPMI power >off module ipmi_poweroff. > >A new module param is added to support this: >parmtype: do_power_cycle:int >parm: do_power_cycle: Set to 1 to enable power cycle instead >of power down. Power cycle is contingent on hardware support, otherwise >it defaults back to power down. > >This parameter can also be dynamically modified through the proc >filesystem: >/proc/ipmi/<interface_num>/poweroff > > This should probably be /proc/sys/dev/ipmi/power_cycle_on_halt. Most things to control a system go there. The /proc/sys/dev/ipmi directory should probably be created by the base IPMI file, too. Thinking about it a little more, this should really be an option for reset, not for power off (thus making the name power_cycle_on_reset). I'm not sure how easy that will be to tie into. It doesn't look easy; there's not something like pm_power_off for reset. All the proc fs stuff should be ifdef-ed appropriately so it will compile with procfs turned off. -Corey >The power cycle action is considered an optional chassis control in the >IPMI specification. However, it is definitely useful when the hardware >supports it. A power cycle is usually required in order to reset a >firmware in a bad state. This action is critical to allow remote >management of servers. > >The implementation adds power cycle as optional to the ipmi_poweroff >module. It can be modified dynamically through the proc entry mentioned >above. During a power down and enabled, the power cycle command is sent >to the BMC firmware. If it fails either due to non-support or some >error, it will retry to send the command as power off. > >Signed-off-by: Christopher A. Poblete <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >-- >Chris Poblete >Software Engineer >Dell OpenManage Instrumentation - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
