IMO, the Record ID should be the first field, before the description/tag field, if the option to include it is specified.
Andy -----Original Message----- From: Albert Chu [mailto:ch...@llnl.gov] Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2012 1:20 PM To: Zdenek Styblik Cc: ipmitool-devel Subject: Re: [Ipmitool-devel] Why ipmitool doesn't display Record ID? Just a comment: > # ipmitool sdr list > T_AMB | 20 degrees C | ok | 46 I'm not sure if this would be a good default. I imagine there are scripts out there with something like: $line = /(.+) | (.+) | (.+)/; Where people are just grabbing all the text after the last delimiter. I think it would be better as an optional output w/ an option. Al On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 00:23 -0800, Zdenek Styblik wrote: > Ok, > > to summarize. > > Pros: > * querying particular sensor is faster compared to current implementation > * in case sensors share the same IPMI name, it's possible to retrieve > specific sensor > * Record IDs are always unique > > Cons: > * Record IDs are dynamically allocated > * Record IDs may and can change at any time > > The list above is just a summary and not meant to imply there are more > pros or cons. > > Proposed implementation: > * extend output of sdr list(all list outputs?) by adding column with > Record IDs; this column > will be added to the end(as the last one) not to break current output > * # ipmitool sensor get INPUT; will accept either IPMI name(current > implementation) or > Record ID > * perhaps even # ipmitool sensor reading INPUT; could/should be extended as > well > > Examples: > # ipmitool sdr list > T_AMB | 20 degrees C | ok | 46 > > # ipmitool sensor get T_AMB > or > # ipmitool sencor get 0x46 > > Z. > > On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 3:28 AM, Albert Chu <ch...@llnl.gov> wrote: > > Hi Hank, > > > > Perhaps I shouldn't have said, "in practice they don't". I should have > > said, "SDRs don't change for many motherboards in many environments." > > Is it the majority of people in the world w/ IPMI servers? My > > perception is yes, but that's my guess. > > > > The question is, what is best for those users/customers? And given the > > user/customer base of ipmitool, what is the best for ipmitool? For > > reasons discussed earlier, I think selecting sensors via record-ID is > > useful and worth the tradeoff risks you describe. That's my 2 cents. > > > > Al > > > > On Tue, 2012-01-03 at 16:55 -0800, Hank Bruning wrote: > >> A large number of computers allow renumbering of the SDR records. In > >> practice renumbering of sensor records has been done for more than a > >> decade. The Intel MPCMM001 from 2001 was the first I can remember. > >> Since then all major computer server vendors, Intel, HP, Dell, IBM, > >> Fujitsu, Sun, SuperMicro (but not Apple or Lenovo) have had systems > >> that renumber SDR records. This is Billions of dollars of hardware > >> sold every year. Renumbering of the SDRs is a very common occurrence. > >> > >> You want the sensor names to be identical and have renumbering of the > >> SDR. > >> Use case. > >> > >> I'm going to use AdvancedMC modules as defined by PICMG because > >> multiple hardware vendors make this hardware and there is no > >> proprietary non IPMI things going on. > >> > >> Four identical AdvancedMC modules are plugged into a MicroTCA or > >> AdvancedTCA carrier. They all have to get power from a common power > >> bus and each one of them will have a voltage sensor for pin 84, > >> Payload power which is +12 Volts. > >> This voltage sensor should have the identical name for each of > >> AdvancedMC modules. There is no advantage in having identical > >> AdvancedMC modules with different sensor names. Yes, some vendors may > >> name the sensor "12 Volt in" and some may call it "12 Volt Pin 84" but > >> if the AdvancedMC modules are identical the sensor names should also > >> be identical. Since the AdvancedMC modules can be plugged in at any > >> time and there is no way to predict the number of sensor records for > >> each AdvanceMC they must be renumbered. > >> > >> Hank > >> JBlade > >> > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Albert Chu <ch...@llnl.gov> wrote: > >> On Tue, 2012-01-03 at 08:22 -0800, Hank Bruning wrote: > >> > The SDR Record ids are dynamic and the same record may have > >> a new > >> > record ID by the time you read it on the screen and start a > >> new > >> > IPMITool. > >> > > >> > The SDR Record IDs are allowed to be renumbered per IPMI > >> 2.0, Section > >> > 33.8 SDR ‘Record IDs’ page 435. When the IPMC Controller > >> reboots or > >> > when the FRU population managed by the IPMC Controller > >> changes the > >> > SDRs most likely will be renumbered but the IPMI Controller > >> is allowed > >> > to renumber the records when ever it wants. > >> > >> While they can change, in practice they don't. It's a useful > >> way to > >> select sensors that several other projects support. I don't > >> see why it > >> couldn't be supported by ipmitool as an option. > >> > >> As a use case example, I've seen some motherboards that have > >> duplicate > >> sensors w/ the same name, so you can't select a specific > >> sensor via > >> ipmitool's current "get SENSORNAME" option. Here's one > >> example of that > >> situation. > >> > >> # ipmitool -I free sensor list > >> Temp | -58.000 | degrees C | ok | na > >> | na | na | 85.000 | 90.000 | na > >> Temp | -59.000 | degrees C | ok | na > >> | na | na | 85.000 | 90.000 | na > >> Temp | 39.000 | degrees C | ok | na > >> | na | na | na | na | na > >> Ambient Temp | 21.000 | degrees C | ok | na > >> | na | na | na | na | na > >> Temp | na | degrees C | na | na > >> | na | na | na | na | na > >> Ambient Temp | na | degrees C | na | na > >> | na | na | na | na | na > >> Ambient Temp | 21.000 | degrees C | ok | na > >> | 3.000 | 8.000 | 42.000 | 47.000 | na > >> > >> # ipmitool -I free sensor get Temp > >> Locating sensor record... > >> Sensor ID : Temp (0x1) > >> Entity ID : 3.1 > >> <snip> > >> > >> Al > >> > >> > Hank > >> > JBlade > >> > > >> > On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Zdenek Styblik > >> > <zdenek.styb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > Hello, > >> > > >> > as subject suggests, my question is why ipmitool > >> doesn't > >> > display Record ID > >> > anywhere in its output. Or have I only failed to > >> look more > >> > thoroughly? > >> > The only thing it displays is Logical Number, if > >> that's > >> > correct term, > >> > eg. ``Sensor ID: T_AMB (0xa5)'' > >> > which is not the same thing. > >> > > >> > Why am I asking about Record ID? It seems it would, > >> well it > >> > can and > >> > is, be useful for eg. looking up specific > >> > sensor and fetching information about it. It also > >> seems to be > >> > crucial > >> > for (fetching) Sensor Data Records. > >> > > >> > Thanks in advance, > >> > Z. > >> > > >> > > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> > Write once. Port to many. > >> > Get the SDK and tools to simplify cross-platform app > >> > development. Create > >> > new or port existing apps to sell to consumers > >> worldwide. > >> > Explore the > >> > Intel AppUpSM program developer opportunity. > >> > appdeveloper.intel.com/join > >> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-appdev > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > Ipmitool-devel mailing list > >> > Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > >> > > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ipmitool-devel > >> > > >> -- > >> Albert Chu > >> ch...@llnl.gov > >> Computer Scientist > >> High Performance Systems Division > >> Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory > >> > >> > >> > > -- > > Albert Chu > > ch...@llnl.gov > > Computer Scientist > > High Performance Systems Division > > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory > > > > -- Albert Chu ch...@llnl.gov Computer Scientist High Performance Systems Division Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Ridiculously easy VDI. With Citrix VDI-in-a-Box, you don't need a complex infrastructure or vast IT resources to deliver seamless, secure access to virtual desktops. With this all-in-one solution, easily deploy virtual desktops for less than the cost of PCs and save 60% on VDI infrastructure costs. Try it free! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Citrix-VDIinabox _______________________________________________ Ipmitool-devel mailing list Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ipmitool-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Ridiculously easy VDI. With Citrix VDI-in-a-Box, you don't need a complex infrastructure or vast IT resources to deliver seamless, secure access to virtual desktops. With this all-in-one solution, easily deploy virtual desktops for less than the cost of PCs and save 60% on VDI infrastructure costs. Try it free! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Citrix-VDIinabox _______________________________________________ Ipmitool-devel mailing list Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ipmitool-devel
