[PATCH linux dev-4.10 0/6] Add support PECI and PECI hwmon drivers

[Jae Hyun Yoo]

On 1/10/2018 12:27 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 11:30:05AM -0800, Jae Hyun Yoo wrote:
>> On 1/10/2018 11:17 AM, Greg KH wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 11:14:34AM -0800, Jae Hyun Yoo wrote:
>>>> On 1/10/2018 2:17 AM, Greg KH wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 02:31:20PM -0800, Jae Hyun Yoo wrote:
>>>>>> From: Jae Hyun Yoo <jae.hyun.yoo at intel.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This patch set provides support for PECI of AST2400/2500 which can give us PECI
>>>>>> functionalities such as temperature monitoring, platform manageability,
>>>>>> processor diagnostics and failure analysis. Also provides generic peci.h and
>>>>>> peci_ioctl.h headers to provide compatibility to peci drivers that can be
>>>>>> implemented later e.g. Nuvoton's BMC SoC family.
>>>>>
>>>>> What is the "dev-4.10" in the subject for?  4.10 is really old and
>>>>> obsolete :(
>>>>>
>>>>> thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> greg k-h
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I made this patch set on top of the v4.10 which OpenBmc project is currently
>>>> using. I'll rebase this patch set onto the current kernel.org mainline.
>>>
>>> What is "OpenBmc", and why are they using an obsolete and insecure
>>> kernel for their project?  That seems like a very foolish thing to do...
>>>
>>> thanks,
>>>
>>> greg k-h
>>>
>>
>> OpenBmc is an open source project to create a highly extensible framework
>> for BMC (Board Management Controller) software for data-center computer
>> systems:
>> https://github.com/openbmc
>>
>> Its current mainline is v4.10 but it is being kept upgrading so it will be
>> upgraded to the latest stable or long-term version soon.
> 
> Why hasn't it been updated in the year since 4.10 was released?  That's
> a _very_ long time to be running on a totally insecure kernel, and no
> new development should ever be done on old kernels, that's even crazier
> (as we can't go back in time and accept patches for new features to old
> releases...)
> 

Thanks for your pointing it out and I totally agree with you. Actually, 
we are preparing 4.13 update for now and an another update will be 
followed up. As I answered above, I'll rebase this patch set onto the 
latest kernel.org mainline. Sorry for my misunderstanding of upstream 
process.

> It sounds like the openbmc project needs to learn how to manage their
> kernels a whole lot better, who do I need to go poke about this?
>  > thanks,
> 
> greg k-h
> 

I've already cc'ed openbmc developers so they are also seeing this 
thread. Joel Stanley <joel at jms.id.au> is the openbmc kernel maintainer.

Thanks,
Jae