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

[Andrew Wozniak]

Hello Anand,

Anand Babu Periasamy wrote:
> ,----[ Andrew Wozniak writes: ]
> | 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
> `----
> Andrew,
> UDM is basically an abstraction layer for all drivers including inband
> and outofband.  In your case, it seems that your tool is inband only
> and ssif specific. You can choose to directly talk to the ssif
> driver.

Per Albert's suggestion, I will not use the UDM model.

My only uncertainty is about giving the local CPU the ability to receive 
events from the BMC - while at the same time allowing it to send 
commands. I've looked but can't seem to find an "event handler" 
capability, other than SEL functions. Does freeipmi provide such a function?

> Let me know if you are struck some where.