RE: RFC: WMI Enhancements

[Mario.Limonciello]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Darren Hart [mailto:dvhart@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, May 8, 2017 2:09 PM
> To: Limonciello, Mario <Mario_Limonciello@xxxxxxxx>
> Cc: a.bokovoy@xxxxxxxxx; andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx; luto@xxxxxxxxxx;
> pali.rohar@xxxxxxxxx; rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; len.brown@xxxxxxxxx;
> corentin.chary@xxxxxxxxx; andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; platform-driver-x86@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: RFC: WMI Enhancements
> 
> On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 06:26:53PM +0000, Mario.Limonciello@xxxxxxxx wrote:
> > (Responding as plain text, your email probably got punted from the ML from
> being HTML)
> >
> > >
> > > ...
> > >
> > > I'm not sure what you are asking about. Samba does not deal with WMI at all.
> The state of affairs is
> > > explained at https://powershell.org/2015/04/24/management-information-
> the-omicimwmimidmtf-dictionary/
> > > -- old WMI (DCOM/RPC-based) is deprecated, new WMI based on WS-MAN is
> supported and OMI is the
> > > implementation. We used to have a very limited attemt at writing DCOM stack
> and nobody worked on
> > > it for years so it got removed.
> >
> > Thanks!  That was a very interesting read.
> >
> > > Microsoft has already published a MOF parser as part of OMI work:
> https://github.com/Microsoft/omi/
> > > under MIT license.
> >
> > Unfortunately that's expecting text MOF, not this intermediary compiled format.
> >
> 
> I presume which of these to use is the decision of the vendor? 

No, MS documentation indicates to store binary MOF in the ACPI buffer.

>Is there a
> transition going on from BMOF to Text MOF? Or will both be part of products for
> the near term?
> 

Binary MOF will be part of products unless MS or a standards group decides to 
announce something new for OEM's to use in this space.

> I'm trying to understand if BMOF is a legacy thing now, or if it will continue
> to be used in new designs.

Should be continued to use in new designs.