Re: [Freeipmi-devel] which API - UDM or default

[Andrew Wozniak]

Hello Albert,

Thanks so much for the reply.

Al Chu wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> > I'm considering FreeIPMI library and API for an upcoming project. It 
> > appears to provide two API forms; UDM and a default. What suggestions 
> > can you offer for choosing one of these models for my application?
> >
> > The SSIF is of specific interest because we need to interface a CPU to a 
> > local BMC via I2C. The CPU needs to send commands and be able to monitor 
> > for sensor events. Will either of the library models support these services?
>
> Both should.   Given your specific need to work with SSIF, I would go
> with the default API.  UDM's primary purpose is to hide underlying
> drivers (KCS, SSIF, LAN, etc.) in tools that may need to use all of the
> drivers (ipmi-sensors, ipmi-sel, etc.).  Tools in FreeIPMI that use only
> specific drivers (IPMI 2.0 LAN in ipmiconsole, IPMI 1.5 LAN in ipmiping,
> etc.) do not use UDM.

Ok, will use the default API.

The only reason I mention SSIF is because it seems to provide the 
"direct" interface that I need between CPU and BMC. Are there any other 
viable options?

I'm also interested in freeipmi because of its simpler (than openipmi) 
structure. In addition to using it in an embedded Linux environment, we 
also want port it for use in a non-OS environment, by low-level POST. 
freeipmi would seem to make this task easier.

> > I'm currently digging through the source code and tools to get a better 
> > understanding of all the available API's  Other than the header files, 
> > does some sort of "API summary" and description exist anywhere?
>
> At this moment I'm afraid not, the documentation for libfreeipmi is
> quite poor.  Personally, I consider libfreeipmi to be more of a
> "convenience" API for those who are somewhat knowledgeable of IPMI. 
> There really isn't too much abstraction of IPMI in libfreeipmi for
> general users.  This is in comparison to libipmiconsole that abstracts
> SOL into a file descriptor interface.
>
> I should note, that in the CVS head, there is a library I wrote called
> 'libipmimonitoring' which abstracts sensors to a very high level.  Not
> sure if that is something you would find useful.  I currently does not
> support SSIF, but it could.

I will take a peek at the code. We basically need to be able to receive 
sensor events and asynchronous messages from the BMC - our BMC does not 
have a SEL.

While monitoring for events, we also need the ability to send commands 
to the BMC - such as sensor thresholds and bridging commands to forward 
messages to other BMCs.

> On that note, there should perhaps be a mini-doc that goes into the doc/
> directory that describes the libraries in FreeIPMI at a high level.
> I'll add that into the TODO.

I don't envy you. I would however be glad to review whatever you contribute.

> Thanks,
> Al
>
> On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 10:53 -0400, Andrew Wozniak wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'm considering FreeIPMI library and API for an upcoming project. It 
> > appears to provide two API forms; UDM and a default. What suggestions 
> > can you offer for choosing one of these models for my application?
> >
> > The SSIF is of specific interest because we need to interface a CPU to a 
> > local BMC via I2C. The CPU needs to send commands and be able to monitor 
> > for sensor events. Will either of the library models support these services?
> >
> > I'm currently digging through the source code and tools to get a better 
> > understanding of all the available API's  Other than the header files, 
> > does some sort of "API summary" and description exist anywhere?
> >
> > Thanks for all suggestions, Andrew
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Freeipmi-devel mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freeipmi-devel