[cgl_discussion] Re: Hot Plug support for PICMG2.16

Mika Kukkonen mika at osdl.org
Mon Jan 13 13:03:22 PST 2003


AFAIK the new version of the license is waiting for OSDL lawyers 
blessing. Anyway, SAForum has clearly communicated that they will
fix their license ASAP (whatever that means when lawyers are
involved...) to solve this problem.

--MiKu

On ma, 2003-01-13 at 10:37, Sousou, Imad wrote:
> What's stopping people from working on SAForum things is the SAF's license
> issue.... has this (When will this) be resolved?
> imad
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mika Kukkonen [mailto:mika at osdl.org] 
> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 10:20 AM
> To: Howell, David P
> Cc: John Grana; greg k-h; cgl_discussion at lists.osdl.org
> Subject: RE: [cgl_discussion] Re: Hot Plug support for PICMG2.16
> 
> 
> On ma, 2003-01-13 at 06:38, Howell, David P wrote:
> > There have been many discussions already about IPMI being closed, 
> > mostly coming from members providing non-IPMI hardware solutions. 
> > Seems like an abstraction layer that could map IPMI or other 
> > implementations would be in order to solve this for both.
> > 
> > Wasn't there something in the SAF platform specs to address this?
> 
> As our resident SAForum insider (Peter) is out of town, I'll take a shot on
> this.
> 
> Yes, SAF platform spec is specified so that other implementations than IPMI
> can meet it and provide the required functionality. In other words, I am
> pretty sure it is possible to make non-IPMI (c)PCI iplementation of the SAF
> platform spec.
> 
> On the other hand, some people seem to think that IPMI is best since sliced
> bread, so in CGL we have not seen any reason to venture outside IPMI,
> although as an overall philosophy we try to stay as HW agnostic as is
> reasonable (i.e. without sacrificing functionality).
> 
> Now the real question (and the main reason for this email) is that who 
> is going to implement the SAF platform spec on top of Linux? Assuming IPMI
> there should not be much impact on the kernel, but as a first step 
> towards the implementation somebody should wade through the spec with those
> two things (IPMI & Linux kernel) in mind and find out what needs 
> to be done. 
> 
> Any volunteers? :-)
> 
> --MiKu
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cgl_discussion mailing list
> cgl_discussion at lists.osdl.org
> http://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/cgl_discussion
-- 
"Good ideas do not die, they just lie down and get recycled." -- me




More information about the cgl_discussion mailing list