From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail02.groups.io (mail02.groups.io [66.175.222.108]) by spool.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E0DBAC0B57 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2023 09:55:24 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; bh=/dDXYqoNF1JWp7iC6Xf0c1jIjTI9wZ6UX8dSA+Z7gMw=; c=relaxed/simple; d=groups.io; h=MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject:To:Cc:Precedence:List-Subscribe:List-Help:Sender:List-Id:Mailing-List:Delivered-To:Reply-To:List-Unsubscribe-Post:List-Unsubscribe:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; s=20140610; t=1696499723; v=1; b=gFcMXKa5VEu1Woo0HtxL8HC+3BshMorrPlIAfTF9RjbbUYzuAst79JA1cGdDEvTwdqrymS27 lgeUc2ZtQHuNcMF1R8fOkLdj9SrTkgdYxYuvPrhW1Zh6pjDXBnyBS6hn2zOW7YvpbvUnb5RkZy2 ZvVZ0GxvA023hUg2M96DXzEs= X-Received: by 127.0.0.2 with SMTP id tJRwYY7687511xoDvOH5Hx3M; Thu, 05 Oct 2023 02:55:23 -0700 X-Received: from mail-ua1-f41.google.com (mail-ua1-f41.google.com [209.85.222.41]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web11.11707.1696499722127121194 for ; Thu, 05 Oct 2023 02:55:22 -0700 X-Received: by mail-ua1-f41.google.com with SMTP id a1e0cc1a2514c-7b0ec7417bdso315564241.2; Thu, 05 Oct 2023 02:55:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: EwZFROCRzs6pQxPeLqZuRSOrx7686176AA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFwhXPA7sIUk08cX1T2JqwoGxlkdTE/+ozrlqYG2BDkcS/+wVWV65/DHg+wQlfuOO8v2ClNQYfZPYbM23qEJa8= X-Received: by 2002:a67:ee48:0:b0:44e:a9b6:5290 with SMTP id g8-20020a67ee48000000b0044ea9b65290mr5023432vsp.19.1696499720841; Thu, 05 Oct 2023 02:55:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: "Konstantin Aladyshev" Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2023 12:55:09 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-discuss] PLDM messages via MCTP over KCS To: "Chang, Abner" Cc: "discuss@edk2.groups.io" , "devel@edk2.groups.io" Precedence: Bulk List-Subscribe: List-Help: Sender: devel@edk2.groups.io List-Id: Mailing-List: list devel@edk2.groups.io; contact devel+owner@edk2.groups.io Reply-To: devel@edk2.groups.io,aladyshev22@gmail.com List-Unsubscribe-Post: List-Unsubscribe=One-Click List-Unsubscribe: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-GND-Status: LEGIT Authentication-Results: spool.mail.gandi.net; dkim=pass header.d=groups.io header.s=20140610 header.b=gFcMXKa5; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed), DKIM not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=gmail.com (policy=none); spf=pass (spool.mail.gandi.net: domain of bounce@groups.io designates 66.175.222.108 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=bounce@groups.io Shouldn't we update the PLDM protocol's 'PldmSubmit' function to receive 'MctpSrcEID'/'MctpDestEID' as incoming parameters? Or maybe add some 'PldmInit' function to set those parameters for further PLDM communication? Because right now the MCTP EIDs are fixed to PCDs with no flexibility https://github.com/tianocore/edk2-platforms/blob/d6e36a151ff8365cdc55a6914c= c5e6138d5788dc/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Universal/PldmProtocol/Common/Pldm= ProtocolCommon.c#L121 Best regards, Konstantin Aladyshev On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 7:03=E2=80=AFAM Chang, Abner w= rote: > > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: discuss@edk2.groups.io On Behalf Of > > Konstantin Aladyshev via groups.io > > Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2023 1:57 AM > > To: Chang, Abner > > Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io; discuss@edk2.groups.io > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-discuss] PLDM messages via MCTP over KC= S > > > > Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper ca= ution > > when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding. > > > > > > > That is great, and I'm surprised there are some build errors at your = end. > > > > I'm surprised your compiler didn't catch that since it is all basic > > syntax errors. > > I've used your https://github.com/changab/edk2- > > platforms/tree/MCTP_OVER_KCS_UPDATE > > directly. > > Ah I know why, I forget to rebuild the changes of both PEC and MCTP EID a= fter I verifying the functionality of IPMI on the new KbcCommonLib.c. Yes, = I do see the build error now and was fixed at my end. My fault. > > > > > > How do you think we just send it to the mailing list for review and k= eep > > working on other problems based on it.? > > > Could you please send the patches out, with you as the author and I'm= the > > coauthor? I will review it again on dev mailing list. > > > > No problem, I can send a patch to the 'edk2-devel' mailing list. > > But before that I think I'll write a test app to check if PLDM > > protocols work correctly. > Ok. > > > > > Also earlier I've pointed to a fact that 'MctpSourceEndpointId' and > > 'MctpDestinationEndpointId' aren't actually used in the > > 'MctpSubmitMessage' function. > > EIDs are always taken from the PCDs: > > https://github.com/changab/edk2- > > platforms/blob/1c8d0d3fa403b47a34667f7f690add7822163111/Features/ > > ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Common/MctpProtocolCommon. > > c#L178 > > What can we do about that? > Ah yes, we should update the algorithm, it is done here: https://github.c= om/changab/edk2-platforms/tree/MCTP_OVER_KCS_UPDATE. You have to update you= r code here: https://github.com/Kostr/PLDM/blob/master/PldmMessage/PldmMess= age.c > And we also need the fix the typo on edk2, https://github.com/changab/edk= 2/tree/MCTP_OVER_KCS_UPDATE > > > > > > Btw, how long do you think I would take to merge your changes on > > openBMC? > > > > So as I've described in the https://github.com/Kostr/PLDM/tree/master > > there are basically 2 approaches for the MCTP stack in OpenBMC: > > (1) userspace approach (legacy, shouldn't be really used now) > > (2) kernel approach > > > > It is hard to tell if OpenBMC patches for the (1) approach will be > > merged. Since I've developed the Linux kernel driver (2) nobody really > > cares about (1). > > > > For the (2) there are a couple of OpenBMC patches which I've helped to > > develop, but I'm just a coathor in them. So it is hard for me to tell > > when they would be merged. For me it looks like they are mostly ready: > > 66591: transport: af-mctp: Add pldm_transport_af_mctp_bind() | > > https://gerrit.openbmc.org/c/openbmc/libpldm/+/66591 > > 63652: pldm: Convert to using libpldm transport APIs | > > https://gerrit.openbmc.org/c/openbmc/pldm/+/63652 > > > > For the (2) I also need to push the mctp Linux kernel driver upstream. > > Linux kernel development is not what I do every day, so I'm not sure > > how long it would take. But I'm pretty determined to finish the work > > and push my driver upstream. Currently there are some questions > > regarding Linux KCS subsystem, so along with the KCS subsystem creator > > we have to figure out how to rewrite the subsystem correctly. So this > > can take some time. > > After the code is pushed to the torvalds/linux, it would be picked up > > by the openbmc/linux automatically. > Ok, I got it. Thanks for the detailed information. > > Regards, > Abner > > > > > Best regards, > > Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 7:12=E2=80=AFPM Chang, Abner > > wrote: > > > > > > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > > > > > > > > > That is great, and I'm surprised there are some build errors at your = end. > > > How do you think we just send it to the mailing list for review and k= eep > > working on other problems based on it.? > > > Could you please send the patches out, with you as the author and I'm= the > > coauthor? I will review it again on dev mailing list. > > > > > > I will take a look on kernal change. Btw, how long do you think I wou= ld take > > to merge your changes on openBMC? > > > > > > Thanks > > > Abner > > > > > > Get Outlook for Android > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: Konstantin Aladyshev > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 4, 2023 11:59:16 PM > > > To: Chang, Abner > > > Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io ; > > discuss@edk2.groups.io > > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-discuss] PLDM messages via MCTP over = KCS > > > > > > Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper > > caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding. > > > > > > > > > Hi Chang! > > > > > > Thanks! > > > There were a couple of trivial compilation errors, but after I've > > > fixed them everything seems to work fine! > > > Just in case I've tested the OpenBMC side with the mctp Linux kernel > > > driver approach > > > (https://github.com/Kostr/PLDM/tree/master/mctp-kernel) > > > The latest kernel patches can be found here: > > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231003131505.337-1- > > aladyshev22@gmail.com/ > > > > > > Here is a fix for the build errors that I've found: > > > ``` > > > diff --git > > a/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Common/MctpProtoc > > olCommon.c > > > > > b/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Common/MctpProto > > colCommon.c > > > index 79501d27aa..345c6da81a 100644 > > > --- > > a/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Common/MctpProtoc > > olCommon.c > > > +++ > > b/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Common/MctpProto > > colCommon.c > > > @@ -193,7 +193,7 @@ SetupMctpRequestTransportPacket ( > > > > > > // > > > // Generate PEC follow SMBUS 2.0 specification. > > > - *MctpKcsTrailer->Pec =3D HelperManageabilityGenerateCrc8 > > > (MCTP_KCS_PACKET_ERROR_CODE_POLY, 0, ThisPackage, > > > MctpKcsHeader->ByteCount); > > > + MctpKcsTrailer->Pec =3D HelperManageabilityGenerateCrc8 > > > (MCTP_KCS_PACKET_ERROR_CODE_POLY, 0, ThisPackage, > > > MctpKcsHeader->ByteCount); > > > *PacketBody =3D (UINT8 *)ThisPackage; > > > *PacketBodySize =3D MctpKcsHeader->ByteCount; > > > *PacketTrailer =3D > > (MANAGEABILITY_TRANSPORT_TRAILER)MctpKcsTrailer; > > > diff --git > > a/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Dxe/MctpProtocol.c > > > b/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Dxe/MctpProtocol.c > > > index 863b8d471c..247d032b9b 100644 > > > --- > > a/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Dxe/MctpProtocol.c > > > +++ > > b/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Dxe/MctpProtocol.c > > > @@ -79,17 +79,17 @@ MctpSubmitMessage ( > > > } > > > > > > // > > > - // Chec source EID and destination EDI. > > > + // Check source EID and destination EID > > > // > > > if ((MctpSourceEndpointId >=3D MCTP_RESERVED_ENDPOINT_START_ID) && > > > - MctpSourceEndpointId <=3D MCTP_RESERVED_ENDPOINT_END_ID) > > > + (MctpSourceEndpointId <=3D MCTP_RESERVED_ENDPOINT_END_ID) > > > ) { > > > DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "%a: The value of MCTP source EID (%x) is > > > reserved.\n", func, MctpSourceEndpointId)); > > > return EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER; > > > } > > > > > > if ((MctpDestinationEndpointId >=3D > > MCTP_RESERVED_ENDPOINT_START_ID) && > > > - MctpDestinationEndpointId <=3D MCTP_RESERVED_ENDPOINT_END_ID) > > > + (MctpDestinationEndpointId <=3D MCTP_RESERVED_ENDPOINT_END_ID) > > > ) { > > > DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "%a: The value of MCTP destination EID (%x) > > > is reserved.\n", func, MctpDestinationEndpointId)); > > > return EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER; > > > ``` > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 2:52=E2=80=AFPM Chang, Abner > > wrote: > > > > > > > > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > > > > > > > > Hi Aladyshev, > > > > I have updated the change you made and put those code on below link= , > > > > https://github.com/changab/edk2- > > platforms/commit/1c8d0d3fa403b47a34667f7f690add7822163111 > > > > > > > > I combined MCTP over KCS changes and IPMI over KCS functionality in > > KcsCommonLib.c. I also created MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_TRAILER as you > > suggested. The source EID and destination EID are checked in > > MctpSubmitCommand as well. IPMI/KCS functionality is verified and works > > fine after this change. > > > > As I am no able to use the corresponding change you made on OpenBMC > > site at my end, could you please help to verify my updates on your mach= ine? > > Let's see how it works. > > > > I also consider to migrate the code that generates MCTP over KCS > > header/trailer from MctpProtocolCommon.c to KcsCommonLib.c, maybe after > > we verifying PLDM->MCTP->KCS route works well on ManageabilityPkg. > > > > > > > > Thank you > > > > Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > Sent: Friday, September 29, 2023 2:18 AM > > > > > To: Chang, Abner > > > > > Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io; discuss@edk2.groups.io > > > > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-discuss] PLDM messages via MCTP o= ver > > KCS > > > > > > > > > > Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use pro= per > > caution > > > > > when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, Chang! > > > > > > > > > > Did you have time to test libmctp MCTP KCS binding solution? > > > > > > > > > > Here are some updates from my end. As I was saying, I was working= on > > > > > the Linux kernel binding solution. > > > > > And now I've finished the initial implementation of the Linux ker= nel > > > > > binding driver for the MCTP-over-KCS binding and proposed all the > > > > > patches upstream > > > > > (https://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg4949173.html). > > > > > I've also updated instructions in my repo > > > > > https://github.com/Kostr/PLDM (the guide for the kernel binding > > > > > solution and all the necessary Linux kernel patches can be found = here > > > > > https://github.com/Kostr/PLDM/tree/master/mctp-kernel). > > > > > So now you can use Linux driver instead of the libmctp utility on= the BMC > > side. > > > > > > > > > > Couple of things that I've noticed in the development process: > > > > > - `MctpSubmitCommand` receives > > > > > 'MctpSourceEndpointId'/'MctpDestinationEndpointId' as arguments. = But > > > > > these values aren't actually used. The current code just uses EID= s > > > > > that were set via PCDs > > > > > (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > platforms/blob/d03a60523a6086d200d3eb1e2f25530bf1cb790e/Features/ > > > > > > > ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Common/MctpProtocolCommon. > > > > > c#L178) > > > > > - According to the specification DSP0236 (section 8.2) MCTP EID 0= to 7 > > > > > are reserved. It is critical that we do not use them since MCTP L= inux > > > > > kernel subsystem checks that part. So we probably need to add som= e > > > > > check to the `MctpSubmitCommand` that would verify that we don't = use > > > > > reserved EIDs. > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 5:32=E2=80=AFAM Chang, Abner > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Aladyshev, > > > > > > Thanks for providing the details, I will take a look at your co= de first, > > > > > implement it at my end and then response to your question. > > > > > > > > > > > > Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, September 8, 2023 8:57 PM > > > > > > > To: Chang, Abner > > > > > > > Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io; discuss@edk2.groups.io > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-discuss] PLDM messages via MC= TP > > over > > > > > KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use= proper > > > > > caution > > > > > > > when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, Chang! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've finished my initial implementation of the MCTP over KCS = binding. > > > > > > > You can find 'edk2-platform' patches and 'openbmc' patches al= ong > > with > > > > > > > all of the instructions in my repository > > > > > > > https://github.com/Kostr/PLDM. I hope you'll be able to repro= duce > > > > > > > everything on your hardware configuration. Feel free to ask a= ny > > > > > > > questions. > > > > > > > Also I've sent all the openbmc patches upstream, hope they wi= ll get > > > > > > > accepted soon. > > > > > > > As for the 'edk2-platform' patches, right now I don't fully u= nderstand > > > > > > > how to write them correctly to keep IPMI over KCS stack worki= ng. I > > > > > > > think here I would need your help. Right now I've commited th= em to > > my > > > > > > > `edk2-platforms` fork > > > > > > > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > platforms/commit/99a6c98a63b37f955c0d0480149b84fcc3a03f74 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Couple of questions/notices: > > > > > > > 1) You've said that we can differentiate MCTP by the transfer= token, > > > > > > > but it is not passed to the 'KcsTransportSendCommand' functio= n > > > > > > > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/bb6841e3fd1c60b3f8510b4fc0a380784e05d326/Features/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityPkg/Library/ManageabilityTransportKcsLib/Common/KcsComm > > > > > > > on.c#L414 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) What function should know about the > > > > > > > MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_HEADER? > > > > > > > Keep in mind that this header includes 'ByteCount' for the in= coming > > > > > > > data size that we need to read. > > > > > > > - KcsTransportSendCommand or CommonMctpSubmitMessage ? > > > > > > > (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/master/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Library/ManageabilityTr= a > > > > > > > nsportKcsLib/Common/KcsCommon.c) > > > > > > > (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/master/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/ > > > > > > > Common/MctpProtocolCommon.c)? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) As I've said earlier I think it would be good to add > > > > > > > MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_TRAILER to the Mctp.h > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) Not sure if it is a good idea to pass these parameters to = the > > > > > > > MctpSubmitCommand protocol function: > > > > > > > ``` > > > > > > > UINT8 MctpType, > > > > > > > BOOLEAN RequestDataIntegrityCheck, > > > > > > > ``` > > > > > > > (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/master/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Include/Protocol/MctpPr > > > > > > > otocol.h) > > > > > > > Shouldn't it be in the `RequestData` directly since it is mor= e of a > > > > > > > payload than a header for the MCTP? I don't know the specific= ation > > > > > > > very well, but what if the RequestDataIntegrityCheck would be= set in > > > > > > > the response? Who would need to check the integrity of the pa= yload > > > > > > > buffer in that case? MCTP library or the code calling the MCT= P > > > > > > > library? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5) Haven't tested the PldmProtocol, maybe it also needs some > > corrections. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Feel free to ask any questions about my solution. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Right now I'll probably focus on the Linux kernel driver for = the MCTP > > > > > > > over KCS binding. So if you want to finish edk2-platforms cod= e based > > > > > > > on my patches, feel free to do it. If not, I'll try to get ba= ck to it > > > > > > > after I finish the Linux kernel driver. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 8:58=E2=80=AFAM Chang, Abner > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See my answer below, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > From: devel@edk2.groups.io On Beha= lf > > Of > > > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev via groups.io > > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, September 1, 2023 12:02 AM > > > > > > > > > To: Chang, Abner > > > > > > > > > Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io; discuss@edk2.groups.io > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-discuss] PLDM messages vi= a > > MCTP > > > > > over > > > > > > > KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Caution: This message originated from an External Source.= Use > > proper > > > > > > > caution > > > > > > > > > when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As I've said there is nothing like "KCS completion code" = in the > > MCTP > > > > > > > > > over KCS binding specification > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://www.dmtf.org/sites/default/files/standards/documents/DSP0254_1 > > > > > > > > > .0.0.pdf). > > > > > > > > > The response packet should have the same structure as a r= equest. > > I.e. > > > > > > > > > a packet with MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_HEADER and PEC. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Currently I'm writing "MCTP over KCS" binding for the Ope= nBMC > > > > > libmctp > > > > > > > > > project. So I can send whatever I want, I don't think my = output > > would > > > > > > > > > be any useful to you. But I've asked this question in the > > community > > > > > > > > > and they also confirmed that the response packet has the = same > > > > > > > > > structure. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://discord.com/channels/775381525260664832/7787906385638850 > > > > > > > > > 86/1146782595334549554) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now I'm a little bit confused about the > > `KcsTransportSendCommand` > > > > > > > > > function. It has the following arguments for the function= output: > > > > > > > > > ``` > > > > > > > > > OUT UINT8 *Response= Data OPTIONAL, > > > > > > > > > IN OUT UINT32 *ResponseDat= aSize OPTIONAL > > > > > > > > > ``` > > > > > > > > > Should we include > > > > > MCTP_TRANSPORT_HEADER/MCTP_MESSAGE_HEADER > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > output or not? > > > > > > > > If the MCTP KCS packet for host->BMC and BMC->host are in t= he > > same > > > > > > > structure, then yes, the response data from BMC should includ= es > > > > > > > MCTP_TRANSPORT_HEADER/MCTP_MESSAGE_HEADER in my > > opinion, as > > > > > this > > > > > > > is defined in MCTP base protocol. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So let me explain the implementation for MCTP over KCS and = what > > do we > > > > > > > miss now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A. MCTP protocol driver linked with KCS Transport interfac= e library > > > > > > > > - In MCTP protocol driver, if the transport interface is= KCS then > > > > > > > > 1. MCTP protocol driver builds up the MCTP KCS trans= port > > header, > > > > > which > > > > > > > is DefBody, NetFunc and ByeCount > > > > > > > > 2. MCTP protocol driver builds up the MCTP payload > > > > > > > > 3. MCTP protocol driver builds up the MCTP KCS trans= port trailer, > > > > > which > > > > > > > is PEC. > > > > > > > > Above three steps are already implemented. > > > > > > > > PEC is calculated by MCTP protocol driver and should= be verified > > by > > > > > KCS > > > > > > > using the same algorithm in my understanding of spec. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > B. In KCS Transport interface library > > > > > > > > 1. KCS Transport interface library sends the transpor= t header got > > from > > > > > > > TransportToken. Same behavior for IPMI protocol, but differen= t > > content. > > > > > KCS > > > > > > > Transport interface library doesn't have to understand this. > > > > > > > > 2. KCS Transport interface library sends the payload > > > > > > > > 3. KCS Transport interface library sends the transpor= t trailer got > > from > > > > > > > TransportToken. Same behavior for IPMI protocol, but differen= t > > content. > > > > > KCS > > > > > > > Transport interface library doesn't have to understand this. > > > > > > > > Above three steps are already implemented. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Then, if Manageability protocol is MCTP, we skip rea= ding > > responses > > > > > > > header (Not implemented) > > > > > > > > For reading response data > > > > > > > > 1. If the ResponseData and ResponseSize is valid i= n the given > > > > > > > TransportToken, then we read ResponseSize data from KCS. (Alr= eady > > > > > > > implemented) > > > > > > > > 2. if Manageability protocol is MCTP, then we skip= reading > > responses > > > > > > > header again (Not implemented) > > > > > > > > Now the response is returned to MCTP protocol driver > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > C. In MCTP protocol driver, we expect to get the whole MCT= P over > > KCS > > > > > > > packet response, that includes DefBody, NetFunc and ByeCount, > > MCTP > > > > > > > message and PEC. > > > > > > > > 1. MCTP protocol driver verifies the returned PEC = with the > > payload. > > > > > > > > 2. Strip out DefBody, NetFunc, ByeCount and PEC an= d then > > returns it > > > > > to > > > > > > > upper layer (e.g., MCTP transport interface library). Returns= only > > MCTP > > > > > > > Transport header and MCTP packet payload as it shows in MCTP = base > > > > > protocol > > > > > > > spec. > > > > > > > > Above is not implemented > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > D. In MCTP transport interface library, we can strip out MC= TP > > transport > > > > > > > header and then return it to upper layer (e.g., PLDM protocol= driver). > > > > > > > > Above is not implemented. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > E. In PLDM protocol driver, > > > > > > > > 1. we verify the Message Integrity Check if the Mes= sage Type > > > > > requests it. > > > > > > > > 2. we can remove MCTP message type then return it t= o upper > > layer > > > > > (e.g., > > > > > > > PLDM SMBIOS transfer) > > > > > > > > Above is not implemented. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We didn=E2=80=99t implement BMC->Host in step C, D and E as= our current > > > > > demand is > > > > > > > to send the SMBIOS table to BMC, which doesn't require the re= sponse > > data > > > > > if I > > > > > > > am not wrong. > > > > > > > > Let me know if it is problematic in the above process. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks and regards, > > > > > > > > Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 6:52=E2=80=AFPM Chang, Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But wait, wee my another comment below, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > From: Chang, Abner > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2023 11:42 PM > > > > > > > > > > > To: devel@edk2.groups.io; aladyshev22@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: discuss@edk2.groups.io > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [edk2-devel] [edk2-discuss] PLDM message= s via > > MCTP > > > > > > > over > > > > > > > > > KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > > From: devel@edk2.groups.io O= n > > Behalf > > > > > Of > > > > > > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev via groups.io > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2023 10:57 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > To: Chang, Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: discuss@edk2.groups.io; devel@edk2.groups.io > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-discuss] PLDM messa= ges via > > > > > MCTP > > > > > > > over > > > > > > > > > KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Caution: This message originated from an External S= ource. > > Use > > > > > proper > > > > > > > > > > > caution > > > > > > > > > > > > when opening attachments, clicking links, or respon= ding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (I don see what is the response header for MCTP K= CS in spec > > > > > though, > > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > mention the KCS response?). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The spec doesn't explicitly mention that the format= of a send > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > response packets differ. So I assume it is the same= and it is > > > > > > > > > > > > described at the "Figure 1 =E2=80=93 MCTP over KCS = Packet Format" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://www.dmtf.org/sites/default/files/standards/documents/DSP0254_1 > > > > > > > > > > > > .0.0.pdf) > > > > > > > > > > > > Therefore the format of a response would look like = this: > > > > > > > > > > > > ``` > > > > > > > > > > > > MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_HEADER > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/master/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Include/Library/Managea > > > > > > > > > > > > bilityTransportMctpLib.h) > > > > > > > > > > > > MCTP_TRANSPORT_HEADER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/blob/master/MdePkg/Include/Industry > > > > > > > > > > > > Standard/Mctp.h) > > > > > > > > > > > > MCTP_MESSAGE_HEADER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/blob/master/MdePkg/Include/Industry > > > > > > > > > > > > Standard/Mctp.h) > > > > > > > > > > > > < response data> > > > > > > > > > > > What do you see the KCS response from BMC? You probab= ly > > right as > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > header and trailer are labeled in different colors = =F0=9F=98=8A. Could you > > > > > please > > > > > > > > > enable > > > > > > > > > > > the debug message to capture it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PEC > > > > > > > > > > > > (Probably we need to define > > > > > > > > > MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_TRAILER) > > > > > > > > > > > > ``` > > > > > > > > > > > We have MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_HEADER defined but no > > > > > > > > > > > MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_TRAILER as it is hardcoded to = one > > > > > byte. > > > > > > > > > > > If the KCS response is PEC, then yes, we can create > > > > > > > > > > > MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_TRAILER for KCS transport > > interface. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the implementation, PEC is calculated in MCTP protoc= ol and > > send > > > > > > > through > > > > > > > > > KCS as the KCS packet trailer. So, when we send the MCTP = request > > > > > through > > > > > > > > > KCS, KCS shouldn't respond the PEC to upper stack, right?= I still > > think > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > response should be the KCS completion code. The debug mes= sage > > from > > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > end may help to clarify this as your BMC has the MCTP KCS > > > > > > > implementation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > > Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So in the "KcsTransportSendCommand" > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/14553d31c72afa7289f6a2555b6e91f4f715a05a/Features/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityPkg/Library/ManageabilityTransportKcsLib/Common/KcsComm > > > > > > > > > > > > on.c#L414) > > > > > > > > > > > > we can check if we transfer is MCTP (based on > > > > > > > > > > > > "TransportToken->ManagebilityProtocolSpecification = =3D=3D > > MCTP" like > > > > > > > > > > > > you've suggested) and handle response accordingly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But which headers should we check in this function?= Only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_HEADER/MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_TRAILER > > > > > > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, only check header and trailer for transport inte= rface. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What about > > > > > > > MCTP_TRANSPORT_HEADER/MCTP_MESSAGE_HEADER? > > > > > > > > > Do > > > > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > > > need to > > > > > > > > > > > > check them here as well? Or do we need to check the= m > > > > > somewhere > > > > > > > > > upper > > > > > > > > > > > > the call stack? > > > > > > > > > > > We should leave this to MCTP protocol driver as this = is belong > > to > > > > > > > protocol > > > > > > > > > > > layer, the upper layer stack. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > > > Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 7:59=E2=80=AFAM Chang, Abne= r > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Aladyshev, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2023 11:09 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: Chang, Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: discuss@edk2.groups.io; devel@edk2.groups.i= o > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [edk2-discuss] PLDM messages via M= CTP > > over KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Caution: This message originated from an Extern= al Source. > > Use > > > > > > > proper > > > > > > > > > > > > caution > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when opening attachments, clicking links, or re= sponding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've started to implement MCTP over KCS binding= for the > > > > > libmctp > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/openbmc/libmctp) and test i= t with > > the > > > > > > > current > > > > > > > > > code > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in the ManageabilityPkg. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was able successfully send the MCTP packet to= the BMC, > > but > > > > > right > > > > > > > > > now > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm having some troubles with receiving the ans= wer back. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think I've found some bug in the > > > > > `KcsTransportSendCommand` > > > > > > > code. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After it sends data over KCS in expects a respo= nce starting > > with > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'IPMI_KCS_RESPONSE_HEADER' > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/14553d31c72afa7289f6a2555b6e91f4f715a05a/Features/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityPkg/Library/ManageabilityTransportKcsLib/Common/KcsComm > > > > > > > > > > > > > > on.c#L476 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Isn't it wrong, assuming that the right header = in case of > > MCTP > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be 'MANAGEABILITY_MCTP_KCS_HEADER' ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I guess the 'IpmiHelperCheckCompletionCode' che= ck after > > the > > > > > data > > > > > > > > > > > > > > receive is also not relevant for the MCTP. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is something I don=E2=80=99t really sure as = I can't verify the > > response > > > > > > > > > payload > > > > > > > > > > > > because our BMC doesn't have the code to handle MCT= P over > > KCS > > > > > > > > > > > command. > > > > > > > > > > > > However it is appreciated if community can help to = verify this. > > As I > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > remember, I can see the return KCS status is 0xC1, = the invalid > > > > > > > command. > > > > > > > > > > > Thus I > > > > > > > > > > > > think if we do a MCTP over KCS, the first response = is still KCS > > > > > response > > > > > > > > > > > header. > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is not what do you see on the BCM it does su= pport > > MCTP > > > > > over > > > > > > > > > KCS? If > > > > > > > > > > > > so, then I would like to have your help to correct = this code. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since 'ManageabilityTransportKcsLib' can be use= d both for > > IPMI > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MCTP, how should we deal with this? > > > > > > > > > > > > > If KcsCommon.c, we can have different code path f= or the > > given > > > > > > > protocol > > > > > > > > > > > > GUID. e.g., if (TransportToken- > > >ManagebilityProtocolSpecification > > > > > =3D=3D > > > > > > > > > MCTP). > > > > > > > > > > > > > Then skip reading the KCS_REPOSNSE_HEADER or to r= ead > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > MCTP_RESPONSE_HEADER (I don see what is the respons= e > > header > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > MCTP > > > > > > > > > > > > KCS in spec though, does it mention the KCS respons= e?). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > > > > > Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 5:18=E2=80=AFAM Chang, = Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please see my answers inline. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: discuss@edk2.groups.io > > > > > > > On > > > > > > > > > Behalf > > > > > > > > > > > Of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev via groups.io > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2023 1:54 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: Chang, Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: discuss@edk2.groups.io; devel@edk2.grou= ps.io > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [edk2-discuss] PLDM messages v= ia MCTP > > over > > > > > KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Caution: This message originated from an Ex= ternal > > Source. > > > > > Use > > > > > > > > > proper > > > > > > > > > > > > > > caution > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when opening attachments, clicking links, o= r > > responding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the answer! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was a little bit confused about the part,= that in the > > same > > > > > > > package > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > actually need to provide different library > > implementations > > > > > for > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > same 'ManageabilityTransportLib', thanks fo= r the > > > > > clarification! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think your DSC example should go into the= package > > > > > > > > > documentation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, this is a good idea. I will update it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As for me, I'm working with the OpenBMC dis= tribution > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/openbmc/openbmc) and my= goal > > is to > > > > > > > > > transfer > > > > > > > > > > > > data > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from the BIOS to the BMC via MCTP/PLDM. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Currently there is no solution for the MCTP= over KCS > > binding > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > Linux, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so I need to add this support: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - either to the MCTP userspace library > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/openbmc/libmctp) [old > > OpenBMC > > > > > way, > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > probably > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > easier] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - or to the MCTP kernel binding > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/torvalds/linux/tree/master/drivers/net/mctp) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [modern mctp Linux driver approach] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Both don't sound like an easy task, so can = I ask, what > > MC > > > > > (i.e. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > management controller) device and firmware = do you > > use on > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > side of the MCTP KCS transmissions? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We use OpenBMC as well, but as you mention th= ere are > > some > > > > > > > > > missing > > > > > > > > > > > > pieces > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to fully support manageability between host and= BMC. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We don=E2=80=99t have code to handle MCTP IPM= I either, the > > edk2 > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityPkg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > provides the framework while MCTP/PLDM/KCS > > > > > implementation > > > > > > > > > > > provides > > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sample other than IPMI/KCS to prove the flexibi= lity of > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityPkg. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Actually, MCTP over KCS is not supported in o= ur BMC > > > > > firmware > > > > > > > yet, > > > > > > > > > > > thus > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BMC just returns the invalid command. However, = the > > transport > > > > > > > > > > > framework > > > > > > > > > > > > > > has been verified to make sure the implementati= on works > > fine > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > expect. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We need help from community to provide more > > > > > manageability > > > > > > > > > > > protocols > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > transport interface libraries to this package. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You've also mentioned PLDM SMBIOS, isn't it= covered > > by > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/master/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Universal/PldmSmbiosTr > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ansferDxe/PldmSmbiosTransferDxe.c > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ah hah, yes I forget I upstream it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please just feel free to send patch to make m= ore > > > > > functionalities to > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > package. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 7:26=E2=80=AFPM Cha= ng, Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Aladyshev, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We use library class to specify the desir= e transport > > > > > interface > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > management protocol, such as MCTP, PLDM and= IPMI. > > This > > > > > > > way > > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > flexibly support any transport interface fo= r the > > management > > > > > > > > > protocol. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here is the example of using Manageabilit= yPkg, which > > is > > > > > > > PLDM > > > > > > > > > over > > > > > > > > > > > > MCTP > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > over KCS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityPkg/Universal/IpmiProtocol/Dxe/IpmiProtocolDxe.inf > > > > > > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityTransportLib|ManageabilityPkg/Library/ManageabilityTranspo= r > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tKcsLib/Dxe/DxeManageabilityTransportKcs.in= f > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityPkg/Universal/MctpProtocol/Dxe/MctpProtocolDxe.inf > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityTransportLib|ManageabilityPkg/Library/ManageabilityTranspo= r > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tKcsLib/Dxe/DxeManageabilityTransportKcs.in= f > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityPkg/Universal/PldmProtocol/Dxe/PldmProtocolDxe.inf > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityTransportLib|ManageabilityPkg/Library/ManageabilityTranspo= r > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tMctpLib/Dxe/DxeManageabilityTransportMctp.= inf > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So you can implement ManageabilityTranspo= rt library > > for > > > > > > > either > > > > > > > > > > > > industry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > standard or proprietary implementation for = the specific > > > > > > > > > management > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > protocol. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BTW, We do have PLDM SMBIOS over MCTP > > > > > implementation > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > upstream yet. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hope this information helps. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Abner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: discuss@edk2.groups.io > > > > > > > > > > > > On > > > > > > > > > > > > Behalf Of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev via groups.io > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2023 7:00 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: discuss ; > > > > > > > devel@edk2.groups.io > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [edk2-discuss] PLDM messages v= ia MCTP > > over > > > > > KCS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Caution: This message originated from a= n External > > > > > Source. > > > > > > > Use > > > > > > > > > > > > proper > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > caution > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when opening attachments, clicking link= s, or > > responding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm trying to build `ManageabilityPkg` = from the > > edk2- > > > > > > > platforms > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > repo to issue PLDM messages via MCTP o= ver KCS. > > Is it > > > > > > > possible > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the current code? I see all the buildin= g blocks, but > > have > > > > > > > trouble > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > putting it all together. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The main question that bothers me is wh= at > > > > > implementation > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > set > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for the `ManageabilityTransportLib`? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > By default it is set to dummy > > > > > > > > > `BaseManageabilityTransportNull.inf` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/master/Features/ManageabilityPkg/ManageabilityPkg.dsc). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On one case to get PLDM via MCTP it loo= ks that I > > need to > > > > > set > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > `DxeManageabilityTransportMctp.inf` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityTransportLib| > > > > > > > > > > > > <...>/DxeManageabilityTransportMctp.inf > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/master/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Library/ManageabilityTr= a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nsportMctpLib/Dxe/DxeManageabilityTransportMctp.inf) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But on the other case if I want MCTP ov= er KCS I > > need to > > > > > set > > > > > > > it to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > `DxeManageabilityTransportKcs.inf` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ManageabilityTransportLib| > > > > > > > > > > > <...>/DxeManageabilityTransportKcs.inf > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > platforms/blob/master/Features/ManageabilityPkg/Library/ManageabilityTr= a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nsportKcsLib/Dxe/DxeManageabilityTransportKcs.inf) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the right way to resolve this? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are no platforms in the repo that= actually > > > > > implement > > > > > > > > > > > > PLDM/MCTP > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > functionality, so there is no example t= hat I can use > > as a > > > > > > > > > reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Konstantin Aladyshev > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >=20 > > > -=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#109347): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/109347 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/100897530/7686176 Group Owner: devel+owner@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [rebecca@openfw.io] -=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-