On Fri, 2008-01-25 at 07:41 -0800, Albert Chu wrote: > Hey Gregor, > > > Btw, to strengthen the case against the command line interface: There > > are different event triggers / event classes. For example, the event > > trigger 02h relates to the "discrete"-event class which describes one of > > the events "Transition to Idle / Active / Busy". Or the event trigger > > 03h. It's a "digital discrete"-event class and describes the events > > "State Asserted / Deasserted". > > I'm glad you brought that up. As I was looking through the spec, I was > wondering how deep I wanted to support the configuration. There are some > "scary areas" in IPMI that I fear configuring b/c so many vendors > implement IPMI poorly. When a vendor configures usernames/passwords > incorrectly, and bmc-config subsequently messes something up, well, its > only a username and password issue. in-band IPMI can still work. > > Potentially enabling/disabling sensor scanning may make things really bad > on a system. Sort of like my initial resisitance to add boot-parameter > configuration to bmc-config. > > I'm thinking perhaps I will just leave these "scary areas" commented out > in the config after you do a checkout. That way, if you really know what > you're doing, you are welcome to uncomment and commit away. It's sort of > like the SOL port field in the bmc-config. That's a scary config that I > don't want people to write to the BMC by default. > > What do you think?
Thinking about this a bit more, I suppose it begs the question, why don't I just leave all fields uncommented until the user wants to configure them. Maybe its enough to say that bmc-config is "generic", but sensors-config is "advanced", so you better know what you're doing if you're going to be using "sensors-config"??? Al > Al > > > Hey, > > > > I would prefer the direct integration into 'ipmi-sensors'. A tool called > > 'ipmi-sensors-config' would be my second choise, if you prefer to let > > ipmi-sensors a read-only tool. > > > > Btw, to strengthen the case against the command line interface: There > > are different event triggers / event classes. For example, the event > > trigger 02h relates to the "discrete"-event class which describes one of > > the events "Transition to Idle / Active / Busy". Or the event trigger > > 03h. It's a "digital discrete"-event class and describes the events > > "State Asserted / Deasserted". > > So in order to the many command line arguments which would be required > > by a command line implementation, the tool would be unclear. > > > > Regards, > > -Gregor > > > > Al Chu wrote: > >> As I look through the IPMI spec, I realize now that setting thresholds > >> has nothing to do w/ the SDR. It seems to be a configurable field > >> independent of the SDR. Event enabling/disabling of the sensor also > >> seems to be independent of the SDR. > >> > >> So perhaps, this should not be 'ipmi-sdr' or 'sdr-config' but rather > >> something else. "ipmi-sensor-config"?? Seems sort of long. Any better > >> ideas for a tool name? Or should we just add a --checkout/--commit/-- > >> diff into 'ipmi-sensors'? The later is an idea I don't like. > >> > >> Al > >> > >> On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 10:39 -0800, Al Chu wrote: > >> > >>> Hey Gregor, > >>> > >>> Cool. I've added it to the TODO. I don't have a timeline for 0.6.0 at > >>> the moment. When I have something more concrete, I'll give you a ping > >>> for some comments. > >>> > >>> Al > >>> > >>> On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 19:31 +0100, Gregor Dschung wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hey Al, > >>>> > >>>> nice news :) > >>>> > >>>> I would prefer a pef-config like interface. The feature to save the > >>>> whole > >>>> config in a file is THE argument to use FreeIPMI. > >>>> > >>>> Regards, > >>>> -Gregor > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Hey Gregor, > >>>>> > >>>>> At the moment there isn't a tool to do this. An 'ipmi-sdr' tool has > >>>>> been on the todo for years. I'm slating this tool to be in FreeIPMI > >>>>> 0.6.0. > >>>>> > >>>>> I haven't thought of an interface that would be suitable for > >>>>> threshold > >>>>> configuration. Would a pef-config/bmc-config like interface be best? > >>>>> Or a command line interface like: > >>>>> > >>>>> --set-upper-threshold=80 > >>>>> --set-lower-threshold=40 > >>>>> > >>>>> ?? > >>>>> > >>>>> Al > >>>>> > >>>>> On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 18:36 +0100, Gregor Dschung wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I'm missing the option to set the thresholds of sensors. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> It would be nice to have a utility like pef-config or bmc-config, > >>>>>> which > >>>>>> allows me to write out the current configuration and to commit a > >>>>>> template file. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Or have I overlooked something? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Best regards, > >>>>>> Gregor > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Albert Chu > >>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>> 925-422-5311 > >>>>> Computer Scientist > >>>>> High Performance Systems Division > >>>>> Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory > >>>>> > >>>>> > > > > > > -- > > Gregor Dschung > > System Life Guard, HiWi > > > > Fraunhofer-Institut für Techno- > > und Wirtschaftsmathematik ITWM > > Fraunhofer-Platz 1 > > D-67663 Kaiserslautern > > > > E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Internet: www.itwm.fraunhofer.de > > > > -- Albert Chu [EMAIL PROTECTED] 925-422-5311 Computer Scientist High Performance Systems Division Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory _______________________________________________ Freeipmi-devel mailing list Freeipmi-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freeipmi-devel