Document the new comptaibles for Asus IPMI card
Signed-off-by: Anirudh Srinivasan <anirudhsriniv@gmail.com>
---
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/aspeed/aspeed.yaml | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/aspeed/aspeed.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/aspeed/aspeed.yaml
index 9298c1a75dd1..b2d20341f8eb 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/aspeed/aspeed.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/aspeed/aspeed.yaml
@@ -79,6 +79,7 @@ properties:
- ampere,mtmitchell-bmc
- aspeed,ast2600-evb
- aspeed,ast2600-evb-a1
+ - asus,ipmi-card-bmc
- asus,x4tf-bmc
- facebook,bletchley-bmc
- facebook,catalina-bmc
--
2.52.0On Sun, 2026-01-11 at 14:10 -0600, Anirudh Srinivasan wrote:
> Document the new comptaibles for Asus IPMI card
>
> Signed-off-by: Anirudh Srinivasan <anirudhsriniv@gmail.com>
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/aspeed/aspeed.yaml | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/aspeed/aspeed.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/aspeed/aspeed.yaml
> index 9298c1a75dd1..b2d20341f8eb 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/aspeed/aspeed.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/aspeed/aspeed.yaml
> @@ -79,6 +79,7 @@ properties:
> - ampere,mtmitchell-bmc
> - aspeed,ast2600-evb
> - aspeed,ast2600-evb-a1
> + - asus,ipmi-card-bmc
It's a bit bike-sheddy, however: the pattern tends to be
${vendor},${platform}-bmc, but as the platform can't be specified and
the card's function is the BMC itself, I'd go with "asus,ipmi-
expansion-card" (I couldn't immediately find a useful identifier other
than the product name).
Andrew
On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 12:01:27PM +1030, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> On Sun, 2026-01-11 at 14:10 -0600, Anirudh Srinivasan wrote:
> > Document the new comptaibles for Asus IPMI card
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Anirudh Srinivasan <anirudhsriniv@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/aspeed/aspeed.yaml | 1 +
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/aspeed/aspeed.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/aspeed/aspeed.yaml
> > index 9298c1a75dd1..b2d20341f8eb 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/aspeed/aspeed.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/aspeed/aspeed.yaml
> > @@ -79,6 +79,7 @@ properties:
> > - ampere,mtmitchell-bmc
> > - aspeed,ast2600-evb
> > - aspeed,ast2600-evb-a1
> > + - asus,ipmi-card-bmc
>
> It's a bit bike-sheddy, however: the pattern tends to be
> ${vendor},${platform}-bmc, but as the platform can't be specified and
> the card's function is the BMC itself, I'd go with "asus,ipmi-
> expansion-card" (I couldn't immediately find a useful identifier other
> than the product name).
This should include some model name or at least soc. What if you have
IPMI card for ast2600 and later completely different for ast2700?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Hi Krzysztof,
On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 5:47 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> >
> > It's a bit bike-sheddy, however: the pattern tends to be
> > ${vendor},${platform}-bmc, but as the platform can't be specified and
> > the card's function is the BMC itself, I'd go with "asus,ipmi-
> > expansion-card" (I couldn't immediately find a useful identifier other
> > than the product name).
>
> This should include some model name or at least soc. What if you have
> IPMI card for ast2600 and later completely different for ast2700?
Personally, I was okay with Andrew's suggestion of naming it
"asus,ipmi-expansion-card" because that's the official product name
and that exact term works well for online searches.
This seems like a pretty niche product Asus announced 4 years ago and
made in very low volumes. I'm not sure if they'll make a new one with
an ast2700, given how the modern trend is to have BMCs on
motherboards. What do you think about the naming Andrew?
--
Regards
Anirudh Srinivasan
On Mon, 2026-01-12 at 15:21 -0600, Anirudh Srinivasan wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
>
> On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 5:47 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > It's a bit bike-sheddy, however: the pattern tends to be
> > > ${vendor},${platform}-bmc, but as the platform can't be specified and
> > > the card's function is the BMC itself, I'd go with "asus,ipmi-
> > > expansion-card" (I couldn't immediately find a useful identifier other
> > > than the product name).
> >
> > This should include some model name or at least soc. What if you have
> > IPMI card for ast2600 and later completely different for ast2700?
>
> Personally, I was okay with Andrew's suggestion of naming it
> "asus,ipmi-expansion-card" because that's the official product name
> and that exact term works well for online searches.
>
> This seems like a pretty niche product Asus announced 4 years ago and
> made in very low volumes. I'm not sure if they'll make a new one with
> an ast2700, given how the modern trend is to have BMCs on
> motherboards. What do you think about the naming Andrew?
I agree that the product seems niche. There's practically nothing on
their website on the marketing side - from searching around the details
are pretty much limited to the support pages. I can't really speak to
future stuff like an AST2700-based design though, who knows.
A couple of numbers turned up that might be helpful:
1. The Quick Start Guide[1] seems to use "E21524", which is also
used by some random blog[2] to identify it.
2. There's "R1.04" on the silkscreen.
Perhaps we could incorporate either of those?
* asus,e21524-ipmi-expansion-card
* asus,ipmi-expansion-card-r1-04
However, they're not without some risk:
1. It's hard to tell whether E21524 is properly representative
2. R1.04 may also problematic as an AST2700-based card will likely
restart the numbering and risk a collision
Otherwise, I guess there's:
* asus,ipmi-expansion-card-ast2600
Andrew
[1]: https://www.asus.com/us/supportonly/ipmi%20expansion%20card/helpdesk_manual/
[2]: https://blog.liaosirui.com/%E7%B3%BB%E7%BB%9F%E8%BF%90%E7%BB%B4/A.%E6%9C%8D%E5%8A%A1%E5%99%A8/%E5%B9%B3%E5%8F%B0%E7%AE%A1%E7%90%86/BMC%E5%BA%95%E6%9D%BF%E7%AE%A1%E7%90%86%E6%8E%A7%E5%88%B6%E5%99%A8/IPMI%E8%BF%9C%E7%A8%8B%E7%AE%A1%E7%90%86%E5%8D%A1.html
Hi Andrew On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 6:57 PM Andrew Jeffery <andrew@codeconstruct.com.au> wrote: > > Perhaps we could incorporate either of those? > > * asus,e21524-ipmi-expansion-card > * asus,ipmi-expansion-card-r1-04 > > However, they're not without some risk: > > 1. It's hard to tell whether E21524 is properly representative > 2. R1.04 may also problematic as an AST2700-based card will likely > restart the numbering and risk a collision > > Otherwise, I guess there's: > > * asus,ipmi-expansion-card-ast2600 > There seem to be multiple revisions of this card. The photos have the revision number printed on the board and the manuals have the E21XXX number on them. R1.01 - E21362 photo [1] manual[2] R1.04 - E21524 photo [3] manual[4] Mine is the latter. There seem to be some differences in the layout of the different headers on the board, but the same set of headers are on both boards. There is only one fw image on Asus's site, so I guess they're the same from a sw point of view. I've linked a screenshot [5] from the webui on the stock fw and it says that the firmware model is "KOMMANDO". Asus also seems to name the fw update file for this board KODO1140.ima (KODO is short for KOMMANDO?, 1140 is the version number). I looked at other Asus Motherboard onboard BMC fw updates and they seem to be named <Mobo Model><version>.ima. Example board "Pro WS W680M" [6], fw update name W680M1121.ima, another example board "Pro WS W790E" [7], fw update name W7901167.ima "asus,kommando-ipmi-expansion-card" is a bit long, so maybe we should go with "asus,kodo-ipmi-expansion-card". SEO for either of the 2 terms is not very good, but that's not what we're looking for here are we? [1] https://uk.store.asus.com/media/catalog/product/9/0/90mc0ah0-mvuby0-7.jpg [2] https://manuals.plus/m/8bcc92c2f7a875eda34d546e0e297d339ea55863fea0c6abcf0f338cd26f299d_optim.pdf [3] https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/Um8AAeSw27JpOYcU/s-l1600.jpg [4] https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/Add-on_card/IPMI_EXPANSION_CARD/E21524_IPMI_Card_QSG_V2_WEB.pdf?model=IPMI%20EXPANSION%20CARD [5] https://ibb.co/kg96CsYY [6] https://www.asus.com/us/motherboards-components/motherboards/workstation/pro-ws-w680m-ace-se/helpdesk_bios?model2Name=Pro-WS-W680M-ACE-SE [7] https://www.asus.com/us/motherboards-components/motherboards/workstation/pro-ws-w790e-sage-se/helpdesk_bios?model2Name=Pro-WS-W790E-SAGE-SE -- Regards Anirudh Srinivasan
On Tue, 2026-01-13 at 16:28 -0600, Anirudh Srinivasan wrote: > Hi Andrew > > On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 6:57 PM Andrew Jeffery > <andrew@codeconstruct.com.au> wrote: > > > > Perhaps we could incorporate either of those? > > > > * asus,e21524-ipmi-expansion-card > > * asus,ipmi-expansion-card-r1-04 > > > > However, they're not without some risk: > > > > 1. It's hard to tell whether E21524 is properly representative > > 2. R1.04 may also problematic as an AST2700-based card will likely > > restart the numbering and risk a collision > > > > Otherwise, I guess there's: > > > > * asus,ipmi-expansion-card-ast2600 > > > > There seem to be multiple revisions of this card. The photos have the > revision number printed on the board and the manuals have the E21XXX > number on them. > R1.01 - E21362 photo [1] manual[2] > R1.04 - E21524 photo [3] manual[4] > > Mine is the latter. There seem to be some differences in the layout of > the different headers on the board, but the same set of headers are on > both boards. There is only one fw image on Asus's site, so I guess > they're the same from a sw point of view. Ah, interesting. So the R1.01 card also has an 'E' number silkscreened on it - 'E248779', though this is different to E21362 from the manual. E248779 seems to alias to a lot of other ASUS things. Given the variance and aliasing it's probably a good idea to avoid them. > > I've linked a screenshot [5] from the webui on the stock fw and it > says that the firmware model is "KOMMANDO". Asus also seems to name > the fw update file for this board KODO1140.ima (KODO is short for > KOMMANDO?, 1140 is the version number). > I looked at other Asus Motherboard onboard BMC fw updates and they > seem to be named <Mobo Model><version>.ima. Example board "Pro WS > W680M" [6], fw update name W680M1121.ima, another example board "Pro > WS W790E" [7], fw update name W7901167.ima > > "asus,kommando-ipmi-expansion-card" is a bit long, so maybe we should > go with "asus,kodo-ipmi-expansion-card". SEO for either of the 2 terms > is not very good, but that's not what we're looking for here are we? So downloading the releases and poking around a bit, there's this: > for f in */*.ima; echo $f; dd if=$f bs=$(math 0x100) count=1 skip=$(math 0x3ff00) 2>/dev/null | strings | sed 's/^/\t/'; echo; end IPMI_EXPANSION_CARD-1.1.26/KODO1126.ima $MODULE$ ast2600e UFW_VERSION=1.01.26 FW_DATE=Jan 9 2023 FW_BUILDTIME=10:23:36 UTC FW_DESC=AST2600EVB SPX-13 TB2 FW_PRODUCTID=1 FW_RELEASEID=RR9 FW_CODEBASEVERSION=5.X IPMI_EXPANSION_CARD-1.1.33/KODO1133.ima $MODULE$ ast2600e UFW_VERSION=1.01.33 FW_DATE=Jul 17 2023 FW_BUILDTIME=09:25:13 UTC FW_DESC=AST2600EVB SPX-13 TB2 FW_PRODUCTID=1 FW_RELEASEID=RR9 FW_CODEBASEVERSION=5.X IPMI_EXPANSION_CARD-1.1.34/KODO1134.ima $MODULE$ ast2600e UFW_VERSION=1.01.34 FW_DATE=Feb 27 2024 FW_BUILDTIME=07:45:26 UTC FW_DESC=AST2600EVB SPX-13 TB2 FW_PRODUCTID=1 FW_RELEASEID=RR9 FW_CODEBASEVERSION=5.X IPMI_EXPANSION_CARD-1.1.35/KODO1135.ima $MODULE$ ast2600e UFW_VERSION=1.01.35 FW_DATE=Aug 20 2024 FW_BUILDTIME=08:32:35 UTC FW_DESC=AST2600EVB SPX-13 TB2 FW_PRODUCTID=1 FW_RELEASEID=RR9 FW_CODEBASEVERSION=5.X IPMI_EXPANSION_CARD-1.1.40/KODO1140.ima $MODULE$ Oast2600e UFW_VERSION=1.01.40 FW_DATE=Apr 15 2025 FW_BUILDTIME=09:52:26 UTC FW_DESC=AST2600EVB KOMMANDO SPX-13 TB2 FW_PRODUCTID=1 FW_RELEASEID=RR9 FW_CODEBASEVERSION=5.X KODO is pretty consistent in the firmware update file name. KOMMANDO as the product identifier also seems reasonable, even if it only appears in FW_DESC in the latest release. KODO -> KOMMANDO seems reasonable. A brief bit of binwalking suggests it's an AMI MegaRAC implementation, and so I expect 'SPX-13' in FW_DESC refers to MegaRAC SP-X[1]. The significance of 'TB2' isn't yet unclear to me. I'm not super concerned about the length of "asus,kommando-ipmi- expansion-card" - I'd prefer it over incorporating the 'kodo' contraction. I guess it's still unclear whether 'kommando' is a (future) line of products or refers to the specific AST2600-based design. Perhaps we could solve a few problems with 'asus,kommando-ast2600' and including the phrase 'IPMI expansion card' in the binding description for something searchable. Andrew [1]: https://9443417.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hubfs/9443417/Data_Sheets/Firmware_Solutions/MegaRAC_SP-X_Data_Sheet_PUB.pdf
On Wed, Jan 14, 2026 at 7:03 PM Andrew Jeffery <andrew@codeconstruct.com.au> wrote: > > KODO is pretty consistent in the firmware update file name. KOMMANDO as > the product identifier also seems reasonable, even if it only appears > in FW_DESC in the latest release. KODO -> KOMMANDO seems reasonable. > > A brief bit of binwalking suggests it's an AMI MegaRAC implementation, > and so I expect 'SPX-13' in FW_DESC refers to MegaRAC SP-X[1]. The > significance of 'TB2' isn't yet unclear to me. Yup. The screenshot in the PDF you linked looks a lot like the webui on stock firmware. AMI has sources for a bunch of stuff ( "unmodified" source tarballs and patches to apply on top of them manually) over here [1]. > > I'm not super concerned about the length of "asus,kommando-ipmi- > expansion-card" - I'd prefer it over incorporating the 'kodo' > contraction. Understood. > > I guess it's still unclear whether 'kommando' is a (future) line of > products or refers to the specific AST2600-based design. Perhaps we > could solve a few problems with 'asus,kommando-ast2600' and including > the phrase 'IPMI expansion card' in the binding description for > something searchable. I will make the compatible "asus,ast2600-kommando-ipmi-card" and have the model name in the DT contain the phrase "IPMI expansion card" for searchability. You mention about adding something to the binding description (that'd end up being more than a one line change to the bindings) but we could just have the DT model name have that information. I'll send out a second version of this series shortly. Thank you for bearing with me on this. Naming things is hard. [1] https://github.com/ami-megarac/OSSW-v13/tree/master/Core/ -- Regards Anirudh Srinivasan
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.