Well, I doubt that openhpi clients are 100% perfect. :) This text in the spec was a big amusement for me the other day.
Anton Pak > Ok, > sorry you are right. I oversee this paragraph. :-( > > But from my perspective this explanation is missing in the description of > the > functions: > WatchdogNum รข€“ [in] Watchdog number that specifies the Watchdog Timer on > a > resource. > and maybe a hint at the beginning (see below, chapter discovery) > > And the client will not work with any other wdt as with the one on number > "0". > > Regards > Lars > > On Monday, 17. May 2010 20:51, [email protected] wrote: >> Lars, >> >> Base HPI spec says (Section 7.5): >> >> ------------------------- >> More than one Watchdog Timer may be supported per resource. Each of the >> Watchdog Timer APIs includes a “Watchdog number” parameter >> to >> address a specific timer accessed through that resource. If the RPT >> entry >> for a resource indicates that it supports Watchdog Timers, then there >> must >> be at least one Watchdog Timer hosted by the resource, with the Watchdog >> number of SAHPI_DEFAULT_WATCHDOG_NUM. If additional Watchdog Timers are >> hosted by the resource, they may have any Watchdog number, and may be >> located by Watchdog records in the RDR repository. >> ------------------------- >> >> Anton Pak >> >> > Hi Michael, >> > >> > the problem with hpiwdt did I also see. From my point of view it is a >> > problem >> > of the client. It takes a default wdt number which doesnt work with >> the >> > simulation data (btw. this data comes from the old Simulator). >> > ... line 164 >> > wdnum = SAHPI_DEFAULT_WATCHDOG_NUM; >> > rv = saHpiWatchdogTimerGet(sessionid,resourceid,wdnum,&wdt); >> > ... >> > >> > At the moment I didn't find the time to write a new client or repair >> the >> > existing one (from my point of view it is only valid for uTCA systems, >> > there >> > it is defined in the mapping spec): >> > The point is, this default value is defined the header file, but you >> will >> > find >> > nothing about it in the HPI-B specification: >> > --- >> > The discovery process typically proceeds in a number of steps, as >> > follows: 1) Open a session to a domain; initially, an HPI User can use >> > the domain identifier SAHPI_UNSPECIFIED_DOMAIN_ID. >> > 2) Read the RPT for the domain. >> > 3) For each resource in the RPT, extract the capability flags for that >> > resource. >> > 4) Read the RDR repository for the resource to find the management >> > instruments >> > available in the resource. >> > ... >> > >> > But I will change the default number in the simulation.data.example. >> If >> > you >> > want to test with the hpiwdt, please change the Watchdog Num value >> from >> > "1" >> > to "0" in simulation.data. >> > >> > Btw. The hpib testsuite works fine with NewSimulator wdt. (I think all >> > test >> > cases should pass) >> > >> > Regards >> > Lars >> > >> > On Monday, 17. May 2010 18:49, Bishop, Michael (ISB Linux/Telco) >> wrote: >> >> Lars - >> >> >> >> I downloaded and tested your latest branch of the new_simulator. I >> just >> >> ran the client samples - and will run other conformance tests later. >> >> >> >> The entity_root is now taken from the openhpi.conf file - which is >> good. >> >> The client samples all ran well - with the exception of hpiwdt. >> I've >> >> attached the output I'm seeing when running this sample client. >> >> >> >> --michael >> >> >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> >> > From: Lars Wetzel [mailto:[email protected]] >> >> > Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 3:03 PM >> >> > To: [email protected] >> >> > Cc: Bishop, Michael (ISB Linux/Telco) >> >> > Subject: Re: [Openhpi-devel] new simulator - cannot build RPMs >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Hi Michael, >> >> > >> >> > with rev 7075 the entity root coming from the simulation data >> >> > file is replaced >> >> > by the entity_root value of the configuration file. >> >> > I didn't make any changes concerning the logfile. As long as >> >> > there is no one >> >> > who will request a change, I will let is as it is. >> >> > >> >> > Regards >> >> > Lars >> >> > >> >> > On Thursday, 13. May 2010 23:25, Bishop, Michael (ISB >> >> > >> >> > Linux/Telco) wrote: >> >> > > Lars - >> >> > > >> >> > > It is okay and legal to have 2 instances of your plugin >> >> > >> >> > specified (as 2 >> >> > >> >> > > stanzas) in the openhpi.conf file. What distinguishes >> >> > >> >> > these stanzas is the >> >> > >> >> > > unique entity_root value. Your plugin should be designed >> >> > >> >> > to handle this. >> >> > >> >> > > In the case of the first stanza, your plugin would add the >> stanza's >> >> > > entity_root value to the path of all resources discovered >> >> > >> >> > in the simulation >> >> > >> >> > > file that are associated with this stanza. In the case of >> >> > >> >> > the second >> >> > >> >> > > stanza, your plugin would add that stanza's entity_root >> >> > >> >> > value to the path >> >> > >> >> > > of all resources discovered in the simulation file that are >> >> > >> >> > associated with >> >> > >> >> > > this stanza, and so on. I would attempt to persuade you that the >> >> > > entity_root value does not even belong in the simulation >> >> > >> >> > data file. The >> >> > >> >> > > source of record for the entity_root is openhpi.conf. >> >> > > >> >> > > Each stanza is unique - in that it has its own entity_root, >> >> > >> >> > and its own >> >> > >> >> > > simulation file. That should allow the plugin to do the >> >> > >> >> > right thing - and >> >> > >> >> > > avoid getting the resources mixed up. >> >> > > >> >> > > In the case of the log files, I'm not sure what to do. >> >> > >> >> > Perhaps each stanza >> >> > >> >> > > should specify its own log file. Does that work? I'm not >> >> > >> >> > sure what is the >> >> > >> >> > > best solution here. Perhaps the plugin should be smart and >> >> > >> >> > recoginize a >> >> > >> >> > > duplicate log file name - and not attempt to open it a >> >> > >> >> > second time - but >> >> > >> >> > > rather just share the file id that was created on the first >> >> > >> >> > file open >> >> > >> >> > > operation. So in this case, a user could set up a common >> >> > >> >> > log file that >> >> > >> >> > > would be shared among the stanzas in openhpi.conf - and the >> >> > >> >> > plugin would >> >> > >> >> > > share the file id for each entity_root that it is using. >> >> > >> >> > Or the user could >> >> > >> >> > > specify unique log file names for each entity_root - and >> >> > >> >> > the plugin would >> >> > >> >> > > use the appropriate one - depending on what resources it is >> >> > >> >> > reporting on. >> >> > >> >> > > I'm just offering some ideas here. >> >> > > >> >> > > Please note that I'm not trying to create more work for you >> >> > >> >> > - I'm simply >> >> > >> >> > > giving you my opinion on how I would expect/want it to work. >> >> > > >> >> > > --michael >> >> > > >> >> > > > -----Original Message----- >> >> > > > From: Lars Wetzel [mailto:[email protected]] >> >> > > > Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 2:58 PM >> >> > > > To: Bishop, Michael (ISB Linux/Telco) >> >> > > > Subject: Re: [Openhpi-devel] new simulator - cannot build RPMs >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > Michael, >> >> > > > >> >> > > > you did everything correct. >> >> > > > It is as you wrote and it is an open issue: >> >> > > > In the beginning of the plugin implementation I had it on the >> >> > > > to do list - >> >> > > > Decide if the replacement of the root entry in the simulation >> >> > > > data by the >> >> > > > root entry of the configuration file makes sense. >> >> > > > I forgot it. >> >> > > > So there is still the configuration entry entity path as a >> >> > > > must, but it isn't >> >> > > > used at the moment. The simulator works with the data >> >> > >> >> > from the file. >> >> > >> >> > > > But now I'm really unsure, if the start of two instances will >> >> > > > work in case the >> >> > > > entity path comes from the configuration file: >> >> > > > I saw also the problem with the logfiles. Both plugin >> >> > > > instances wrote in the >> >> > > > same logfiles. So, if both instances take the first logfile >> >> > > > entry of the >> >> > > > configuration file (both instances have the same plugin name: >> >> > > > new_simulator) >> >> > > > how can I ensure that the second instance will take the >> >> > > > correct entity path >> >> > > > entry? I have to investigate it. >> >> > > > >> >> > > > My opinion: >> >> > > > I think, it could be worth to discuss it separately, if it is >> >> > > > better to take >> >> > > > the root ep from the data file or from the configuration file. >> >> > > > >> >> > > > I will do the change in both direction - remove the >> >> > > > configuration file entry >> >> > > > or replace the data input by the configuration entry. >> >> > > > My favorite it to remove the configuration entry. So you will >> >> > > > be able to run >> >> > > > more than one instance. >> >> > > > >> >> > > > Regards >> >> > > > Lars >> >> > > > >> >> > > > On Thursday, 13. May 2010 22:20, you wrote: >> >> > > > > Lars - >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > I also tested your new simulator with multiple stanzas in >> >> > > > >> >> > > > the openhpi.conf >> >> > > > >> >> > > > > file. All I changed from the first stanza to the second >> >> > > > >> >> > > > stanza was the >> >> > > > >> >> > > > > entity_root value. >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > On the first stanza, I used: {SYSTEM_CHASSIS, 9} as you >> >> > >> >> > show in the >> >> > >> >> > > > > commented stanza for your plugin. >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > On the second stanza, I used: {SYSTEM_CHASSIS, 10} >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > I also added a second simulation.data file call >> >> > > > >> >> > > > simulation.data10 - but >> >> > > > >> >> > > > > instead of referring to {SYSTEM_CHASSIS, 1} as is the >> >> > >> >> > case with the >> >> > >> >> > > > > simulation.data you included, I changed this to >> >> > >> >> > {SYSTEM_CHASSIS, 2}. >> >> > >> >> > > > > While this all seems to work with hpitop and hpitree - >> >> > > > >> >> > > > there is something >> >> > > > >> >> > > > > weird going on. No where in the output of hpitop or >> >> > > > >> >> > > > hpitree is there any >> >> > > > >> >> > > > > reference to my entity_root values that I specified in the >> >> > > > >> >> > > > openhpi.conf >> >> > > > >> >> > > > > file. It seems as though your simulator plugin is ignoring >> >> > > > >> >> > > > the entity_root >> >> > > > >> >> > > > > values that I am using in the openhpi.conf file. Every >> >> > > > >> >> > > > entity path should >> >> > > > >> >> > > > > have either {SYSTEM_CHASSIS, 9} or {SYSTEM_CHASSIS, 10} at >> >> > > > >> >> > > > the root of the >> >> > > > >> >> > > > > path as specified in the openhpi.conf file - but instead, >> >> > > > >> >> > > > it appears that >> >> > > > >> >> > > > > your plugin is taking the entity_root value directly from the >> >> > > > > simulation.data files. >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > I'm including my openhpi.conf file, my 2 simulation.data >> >> > > > >> >> > > > files, and the >> >> > > > >> >> > > > > output of hpitop, and hpitree - so that perhaps you can >> >> > >> >> > have a look. >> >> > >> >> > > > > Pehaps I have this misconfigured this. Please let me know. >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > Regards, >> >> > > > > --michael >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > Regards, >> >> > > > > Michael Bishop >> >> > > > > Enterprise Servers and Storage (ISB Linux/Telco) >> >> > > > > Hewlett-Packard Company >> >> > > > > 3404 E. Harmony Rd. Bldg. 5L, Post B7, Mailstop 42 >> >> > > > > Fort Collins, CO 80528-9599 >> >> > > > > Phone: 970-898-4393 >> >> > > > > E-Mail: [email protected] >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > > -----Original Message----- >> >> > > > > > From: Lars Wetzel [mailto:[email protected]] >> >> > > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 1:26 PM >> >> > > > > > To: [email protected] >> >> > > > > > Cc: Bishop, Michael (ISB Linux/Telco); Sutula, Bryan >> >> > >> >> > (Open Source >> >> > >> >> > > > > > Program Office); Andy Cress >> >> > > > > > Subject: Re: [Openhpi-devel] new simulator - cannot build >> RPMs >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > Hi together, >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > no I didn't test it until 5 min ago: >> >> > > > > > I duplicated the simulation.data file, replaced the EP >> >> > > > >> >> > > > root entry and >> >> > > > >> >> > > > > > duplicate the libnew_simulator entry in the openhpi.conf >> file. >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > And it works - with some limitiations: >> >> > > > > > - Both plugin instances use the same logfiles. >> >> > > > > > - I didn't run any test cases >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > A missing feature allows it: The plugin doesn't replace the >> >> > > > > > root - entry of >> >> > > > > > the EP. First I had it on the "to do" list, later I forgot >> it >> >> > > > > > and now I think >> >> > > > > > it could make sense not to change it. :-) >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > Btw. I will replace the default entry to an absolute path >> in >> >> > > > > > openhpi.conf.example. >> >> > > > > > I'm not so familiar with configure.in and didn't find an >> >> > > > > > entry to change the >> >> > > > > > openhpi.conf.example, so I will let is at it is. I want to >> >> > > > > > have as less >> >> > > > > > impact as possible on the openhpi configuration with the >> >> > > > >> >> > > > new plugin. >> >> > > > >> >> > > > > > Regards >> >> > > > > > Lars >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > On Wednesday, 12. May 2010 22:31, Bishop, Michael (ISB >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > Linux/Telco) wrote: >> >> > > > > > > > This seems reasonable if the simulator behaves >> >> > >> >> > like the other >> >> > >> >> > > > > > > > plug-ins. >> >> > > > > > > > Does this mean that you can run several instances of >> the >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > new simulator >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > with different data files for each, assuming you have >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > multiple stanzas >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > in the openhpi.conf file? >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > Bryan >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > Good question, Bryan. >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > Lars have you tested your new simulator with multiple >> >> > > > >> >> > > > stanzas in the >> >> > > > >> >> > > > > > > openhpi.conf file - with each stanza specifying a >> different >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > simulation.data >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > file? Seems like this should work - if your design >> follows >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > the normal >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > rules for plugins. >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > --michael >> >> > >> >> > -------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> > >> >> > > > > > > > ---------------- >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ >> >> > > > > > > > Openhpi-devel mailing list >> >> > > > > > > > [email protected] >> >> > > > > > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openhpi-devel >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> > > > > > ------------- >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >--- >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ >> >> > > > > > > Openhpi-devel mailing list >> >> > > > > > > [email protected] >> >> > > > > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openhpi-devel >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > -- >> >> > > > > > ------------------------------- >> >> > > > > > Dipl. Wi.ing. >> >> > > > > > Lars Wetzel >> >> > > > > > Uttinger Str. 13 >> >> > > > > > 86938 Schondorf a. Ammersee >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > Tel.: 0179-2096845 >> >> > > > > > Mail: [email protected] >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > USt-IdNr.: DE181396006 >> >> > > > >> >> > > > -- >> >> > > > ------------------------------- >> >> > > > Dipl. Wi.ing. >> >> > > > Lars Wetzel >> >> > > > Uttinger Str. 13 >> >> > > > 86938 Schondorf a. Ammersee >> >> > > > >> >> > > > Tel.: 0179-2096845 >> >> > > > Mail: [email protected] >> >> > > > >> >> > > > USt-IdNr.: DE181396006 >> >> > >> >> > -------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> > ------------- >> >> > >> >> > >--- >> >> > > >> >> > > _______________________________________________ >> >> > > Openhpi-devel mailing list >> >> > > [email protected] >> >> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openhpi-devel >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > ------------------------------- >> >> > Dipl. Wi.ing. >> >> > Lars Wetzel >> >> > Uttinger Str. 13 >> >> > 86938 Schondorf a. Ammersee >> >> > >> >> > Tel.: 0179-2096845 >> >> > Mail: [email protected] >> >> > >> >> > USt-IdNr.: DE181396006 >> > >> > -- >> > ------------------------------- >> > Dipl. Wi.ing. >> > Lars Wetzel >> > Uttinger Str. 13 >> > 86938 Schondorf a. Ammersee >> > >> > Tel.: 0179-2096845 >> > Mail: [email protected] >> > >> > USt-IdNr.: DE181396006 >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >----- >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Openhpi-devel mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openhpi-devel >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>--- >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Openhpi-devel mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openhpi-devel > > -- > ------------------------------- > Dipl. Wi.ing. > Lars Wetzel > Uttinger Str. 13 > 86938 Schondorf a. Ammersee > > Tel.: 0179-2096845 > Mail: [email protected] > > USt-IdNr.: DE181396006 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Openhpi-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openhpi-devel
