Al, My email is directly related to your thread, but there are more issues with incorrect interpretation than you identified. The "event/reading type code" must be used to identify a Threshold vrs a Discrete sensor and the "analog data format" flag should be used to identify analog vrs discrete units. I agree that having a discrete sensor return an analog reading "makes no sense", but I don't see why ipmtool shouldn't rely on the "analog data format" being set correctly instead of making assumptions.
-- Jim Mankovich | jm...@hp.com -- On 2/21/2012 12:57 PM, Albert Chu wrote: > I suppose this is now related to this thread I started awhile back due > to something I found on an HP machine. > > http://www.mail-archive.com/ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg01654.html > >> The IPMI Specification is not clear if a discrete sensor can return >> units. > Agreed that it does not appear to be illegal, however to me, a discrete > sensor that returns an analog reading "makes no sense". Here are some > sensors on an HP machine that had a discrete event type but an analog > reading (I'm using FreeIPMI's output): > > 6 | Power Supply 1 | Power Supply | 1200.00 | W | 'Presence detected' > > 10 | Fan 5 | Fan | 76.83 | % | 'transition to Running' > > is 1200W/76.83% high? low? normal? > > Al > > > On Tue, 2012-02-21 at 11:17 -0800, Schoeller, Patrick (iLO - Houston, > TX) wrote: >> The IPMI Specification is not clear if a discrete sensor can return >> units. I think the Event Reading Code is really the key indicator if >> this is a threshold sensor or a discrete sensor. For the Discrete >> Sensor, the value could be anything. Again, the IPMI Specification has >> never clarified this and I agree with Jim that the Event Reading Code >> should be the determining factor. >> >> HP ProLiant servers do return a value in the data field of the "Get >> Sensor Reading" command on some discrete sensors. But the "Reading >> Mask" are set correctly for the Event Reading Code. The "ipmitool" >> application, however, sees a non-zero value and tries to use the >> "Threshold Reading Mask" bits. >> >> A patch for this had been submitted upstream by Dann Frazier a couple >> years ago. Not sure where it went. >> >> Pat >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Albert Chu [mailto:ch...@llnl.gov] >> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 13:12 >> To: Mankovich, Jim >> Cc: ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> Subject: Re: [Ipmitool-devel] Sensor display logic issues >> >> Hi Jim, >> >> On Tue, 2012-02-21 at 10:03 -0800, Jim Mank wrote: >>> All, >>> >>> I've been looking a incorrect sensor display issues with the ipmitool >>> that I would like >>> to get some feedback on before proposing a specific solution. >>> 1. ipmitool does not properly decode discrete vrs analog units >>> in all cases >>> 2. ipmitool does not correctly identify the Threshold Sensor >>> class for Compact and >>> Full sensors. >>> For #1, the IPMI spec states that the sensor units are identified in >>> the Full and Compact >>> SDR by the setting in the "Sensor Units 1" Field bits [7:6] "Analog >>> (numeric) Data Format". >>> See the "Sensor Units 1" Field description on pages 522 and 528 of the >>> latest IPMI spec. >>> The "Sensor Units 1" Field bits [7:6] field is not used in all cases >>> by the ipmitool to determine >>> discrete vrs analog sensor units. >> Discrete sensors technically shouldn't have units. Do you mean that >> sensors are being mis-interpreted as discrete when they should be >> analog? Or vice versa? >> >> Al >> >>> For #2, both the Full and Compact SDR field "Event/Reading Type Code" >>> field identifies >>> whether or not a Event/Reading type is of class Threshold. This >>> field should be used by both >>> the Full and Compact sensor display routines to identify that the >>> given sensor class is of type >>> Threshold. See "Event/Reading Type Code" on pages 519 and 525 of the >>> latest IPMI spec >>> and Table 42-1 and Table 42-2. >>> >>> In working through a possible solutions to the above issues, I started >>> looking in detail at the >>> feasibility of merging ipmi_sdr_print_sensor_compact and >>> ipmi_sdr_print_sensor_full into a >>> single function. In investigating this, I found a dissimilarity in >>> how these two routines treat the >>> global output flags, verbose, csv_verbose and sdr_extended. I >>> believe these two routines >>> should be treating these global output flags in exactly the same way. >>> For example, if you specify >>> both csv_output and verbose (-c -v) , the full print routine will >>> output csv formatted information >>> and use more verbose output for certain fields, but, the compact print >>> routine will not output >>> csv formatted information at all. I think the compact display >>> routine should be changed >>> to interpret these global output flags in exactly the same was as the >>> full display routine does. >>> >>> Here are the main questions I am looking for some feedback on: >>> >>> Is my interpretation of the IPMI spec with regard to #1 and #2 >>> consistent with other peoples >>> understandings? >>> >>> Can the compact sensor print routine (ipmi_sdr_print_sensor_compact) >>> be changed to interpret >>> the global output flags in the same way that the full sensor print >>> routine interprets them? >>> >>> Thanks in advance, >>> -- >>> -- Jim Mankovich | jm...@hp.com -- >> -- >> Albert Chu >> ch...@llnl.gov >> Computer Scientist >> High Performance Systems Division >> Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow! >> The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers >> is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, >> Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d >> _______________________________________________ >> Ipmitool-devel mailing list >> Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ipmitool-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d _______________________________________________ Ipmitool-devel mailing list Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ipmitool-devel
