redfish: Add OEM BMC Pairing schema for IBM by abhilashraju · Pull Request #1437 · ibm-openbmc/bmcweb

abhilashraju · 2026-04-14T04:18:23Z

Add OemBmcPairing schema to support BMC pairing functionality. This includes:

CSDL schema definition (OemBmcPairing_v1.xml)
JSON schema files (OemBmcPairing.json and OemBmcPairing.v1_0_0.json)
Meson build configuration update

The schema defines:

BmcPairing complex type with Paired status and AvailableBmcs list
Pair action to establish pairing between BMCs

This enables discovery and pairing of multiple BMCs in the system.

jeaaustx

I'm not an expert on schema definitions, but I've noted some things which don't look correct to me.

I also see the Manager schema has a separate "OemActions" and "Oem" defined. Is that where this would be linked?

jeaaustx · 2026-04-15T16:09:20Z

+    </edmx:Reference>
+    <edmx:Reference Uri="http://redfish.dmtf.org/schemas/v1/Manager_v1.xml">
+        <edmx:Include Namespace="Manager" />
+        <edmx:Include Namespace="Manager.v1_0_0" />


1210 is using #Manager.v1_15_0.Manager, should this match that?

jeaaustx · 2026-04-15T16:13:16Z

+                    <Annotation Term="OData.Description"
+                        String="The names of BMCs that are available for pairing." />
+                    <Annotation Term="OData.LongDescription"
+                        String="This property shall contain an array of names of BMCs that are discovered and available for pairing with this BMC. This array may be empty if no BMCs are currently available for pairing." />


What is meant here by "names of BMCs"? Is this a Redfish link, DBus object path?

No. It is a unique identifier for BMC(String) . In our case it will be "peer" and "self". This will be passed as argument for pairing action.

For clarity I think the long description should specify this level of detail.

jeaaustx · 2026-04-15T16:16:36Z

+                <Parameter Name="BmcName" Type="Edm.String" Nullable="false">
+                    <Annotation Term="OData.Description" String="The name of the BMC to pair with." />
+                    <Annotation Term="OData.LongDescription"
+                        String="This parameter shall contain the name or identifier of the BMC to establish pairing with." />


What is meant here by name or identifier? Is this a Redfish link, DBus object path?

Its not redfish link. It is a string name (peer or self)

jeaaustx · 2026-04-15T16:18:51Z

@@ -0,0 +1,84 @@
+{
+    "$id": "http://redfish.dmtf.org/schemas/v1/OemBmcPairing.v1_0_0.json",


Shouldn't this be a bmcweb github path instead?

I checked with other examples. Yes it should be gi hub path.

jeaaustx · 2026-04-15T16:20:49Z

+                },
+                "AvailableBmcs": {
+                    "description": "The names of BMCs that are available for pairing",
+                    "longDescription": "This property shall contain an array of names of BMCs that are discovered and available for pairing with this BMC. This array may be empty if no BMCs are currently available for pairing.",


Same question here on meaning of names

It is answered above

jeaaustx · 2026-04-15T16:22:04Z

+            "parameters": {
+                "BmcName": {
+                    "description": "The name of the BMC to pair with",
+                    "longDescription": "This parameter shall contain the name or identifier of the BMC to establish pairing with.",


Same question here on meaning of name

Answered above

jeaaustx · 2026-04-15T16:26:34Z

+            },
+            "type": "object"
+        },
+        "Pair": {


The DMTF schemas define the Actions separately under "Actions". I'm wondering if this should be done similarly?

You have any example for it?

Here is one of them, I'm seeing it in many of them:

bmcweb/redfish-core/schema/dmtf/json-schema/Fan.v1_6_0.json

Line 7 in d3b06e7

"Actions": {

https://redfish.dmtf.org/schemas/v1/Fan.v1_6_0.json

baemyung · 2026-04-15T18:08:27Z

Before going thru the deeper code review, I notified the Oem schema naming (namespace).
It is suggested to use the vendor name as a schema name prefix - https://github.com/openbmc/bmcweb/blob/master/docs/OEM_SCHEMAS.md?plain=1#L86-L92.
So, it would be better to use IBMBmcPairing.json, or I think it may be better to use IBMManagerPairing.json

(BTW, the reason to keep OemUpdateService without renaming is because it has been used externally by the users or customers...and thus decided to leave it as unchanged)

gtmills

Let's talk more on if we want to go this direction.. I still think we should go with
standard Redfish even if being slightly misused..

Add OemBmcPairing schema to support BMC pairing functionality. This includes: - CSDL schema definition (OemBmcPairing_v1.xml) - JSON schema files (OemBmcPairing.json and OemBmcPairing.v1_0_0.json) - Meson build configuration update The schema defines: - BmcPairing complex type with Paired status and AvailableBmcs list - Pair action to establish pairing between BMCs This enables discovery and pairing of multiple BMCs in the system. Signed-off-by: Abhilash R <abhilash.kollam@gmail.com>

abhilashraju · 2026-04-27T08:48:21Z

Before going thru the deeper code review, I notified the Oem schema naming (namespace). It is suggested to use the vendor name as a schema name prefix - https://github.com/openbmc/bmcweb/blob/master/docs/OEM_SCHEMAS.md?plain=1#L86-L92. So, it would be better to use IBMBmcPairing.json, or I think it may be better to use IBMManagerPairing.json

(BTW, the reason to keep OemUpdateService without renaming is because it has been used externally by the users or customers...and thus decided to leave it as unchanged)

I followed naming used by OemUpdateSerivice

asmithakarun · 2026-05-14T12:32:05Z

Please add how the redfish response and request looks like in the commit message

abhilashraju requested review from baemyung, gtmills, jeaaustx and raviteja-b April 14, 2026 04:18

abhilashraju force-pushed the adding_bmc_pairing_schema branch from dff2427 to b23e143 Compare April 14, 2026 06:01

raviteja-b requested a review from asmithakarun April 14, 2026 13:58

jeaaustx reviewed Apr 15, 2026

View reviewed changes

gtmills requested changes Apr 15, 2026

View reviewed changes

abhilashraju force-pushed the adding_bmc_pairing_schema branch from b23e143 to 8500066 Compare April 27, 2026 08:45

		@@ -0,0 +1,84 @@
		{
		"$id": "http://redfish.dmtf.org/schemas/v1/OemBmcPairing.v1_0_0.json",

Uh oh!

Conversation

abhilashraju commented Apr 14, 2026

Uh oh!

jeaaustx left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

baemyung commented Apr 15, 2026

Uh oh!

gtmills left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

abhilashraju commented Apr 27, 2026

Uh oh!

asmithakarun commented May 14, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants