dmidecode-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [dmidecode] [PATCH] dmidecode: additions from smbios 2.6.1 spec upda


From: Jarod Wilson
Subject: Re: [dmidecode] [PATCH] dmidecode: additions from smbios 2.6.1 spec update
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 14:57:50 -0400
User-agent: KMail/1.12.0 (Linux/2.6.29.6-217.2.8.fc11.x86_64; KDE/4.3.0; x86_64; ; )

On Friday 28 August 2009 13:03:08 Jean Delvare wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 11:23:35 -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> > On Friday 28 August 2009 11:05:06 Jean Delvare wrote:
> > > Hi Jarod,
> > > 
> > > On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 09:25:40 -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> > > > dmidecode: additions from smbios 2.6.1 spec update
...
> I didn't check, did you add full support for SMBIOS 2.6.1 already?

Yeah, I *think* I got everything. Just double-checked the changelog
and the processor list, everything seems to be there now.

> If
> you did, then you probably want to update the specification reference
> at the top of the source file.

Are you referring to the SUPPORTED_SMBIOS_VER define at the top of
dmidecode.c? If so, it looks like there's some work to do to properly
support version checking with the third revision level... The SMBIOS
structure table (section 2.1.1) doesn't seem to provide support for
anything more than major/minor either.

> Also please make it visible in the
> CHANGELOG file. You may search for the SMBIOS 2.6.0 support addition
> for how this could be formatted.

Will do.

> > > Other than that, it looks good to me (although I admit I did not
> > > cross-check with the SMBIOS specifications). Thanks for your
> > > contribution!
> > 
> > No problem. Reasonably sure I got everything else right, but its also
> > possible there are things I neglected to add...
> 
> I have 3 SMBIOS 2.6 implementations at hand and things look OK after
> adding the missing commas.

The HP DL360 G6 I tested on was a 2.6.1 implementation, with LGA1366
sockets, DDR3 memory and PCI-E Gen 2 slots, all of which were reported
correctly. Our QA folks are going to be running it across a wider array
of hardware shortly too (now that I've corrected the missing commas on
our end too).

-- 
Jarod Wilson
address@hidden




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]