freeipmi-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Freeipmi-devel] Fwd: ipmimonitoring-sensors.c discretereading worka


From: Florian
Subject: Re: [Freeipmi-devel] Fwd: ipmimonitoring-sensors.c discretereading workaround
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2018 16:53:03 +0100

Unfortunately the behaviour seems to be same as before.
Also I found out that this also happens when I just set ignore_non_interpretable_sensors to 0, regardless of the discrete_reading.
Here are the debug logs again: https://privatebin.florianstroeger.com/?a6ca58fafa858533#UnYEGT64uxq1Pt5p//LVT2jxzga2sKGeUhURExSixkE=
(Again, more than 6800 lines)

Florian


On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 10:47 PM Albert Chu <address@hidden> wrote:
Ahh, you didn't mention there was an error message :-)

I think this is just a corner case in the example, where it should only
be calling a function if the bitmask type is known.  I've updated the
example in the same branch.  Could you give it a try?

Al

On Wed, 2018-12-12 at 20:41 +0100, Florian wrote:
> Hey,
>
> Yes, your recapitulation is correct.
> I've also done everything you said in your email again and added the
> both debug parameters.
> Here is the log: https://privatebin.florianstroeger.com/?fd665f9cdea8
> a9c8#F8H5p5lmKmTqiUkMhfwSZgeKLjcyPfrMaXmCj6b0TTQ=
> (more than 6800 lines of output)
>
> Florian
>
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 8:12 PM Albert Chu <address@hidden> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2018-12-12 at 12:27 +0100, Florian wrote:
> > > Sorry, I forgot.
> > > 
> > > I finally get the readings: 
> > > address@hidden:~/ipmi# gcc -O2 -o ipmimonitoring-
> > sensors
> > > ipmimonitoring-sensors.c -lipmimonitoring && ./ipmimonitoring-
> > sensors
> > > Record ID, Sensor Name, Sensor Number, Sensor Type, Sensor State,
> > > Sensor Reading, Sensor Units, Sensor Event/Reading Type Code,
> > Sensor
> > > Event Bitmask, Sensor Event String
> > > 5, Power Meter, 5, Current, N/A, 174.00, W, 9h, 2h, 'Device
> > Enabled'
> >
> > Ok, good, that means it's working.
> >
> > > The only thing now is, I only get it when I set record_ids[] to
> > {5,
> > > 0}  and record_ids_length = 1.
> > > If I set them to the default values (0 and 0), nothing shows,
> > unless
> > > I set ignore_non_interpretable_sensors to 1.
> >
> > Wait a second, so lets go back to the default example file that
> > comes
> > with FreeIPMI.
> >
> > This default example file shows most sensors, but not #5.  And #8 &
> > #9
> > don't have watt readings.  Correct?
> >
> > If you set discrete_reading = 1, watt readings show up on #8 & #9,
> > but
> > sensor #5 still doesn't show up?  That's what I would expect.
> >
> > If you then set ignore_non_interpretable_sensors = 0, then I would
> > expect record #5's sensor to show up w/ watt readings.  But you're
> > saying at this point no sensors are output at all?
> >
> > Al
> >
> > > Florian
> > > 
> > > On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 12:50 AM Albert Chu <address@hidden>
> > wrote:
> > > > Just to double check, ignore_non_interpretable_sensors is set
> > to 0?
> > > > 
> > > > Al
> > > > 
> > > > On Tue, 2018-12-11 at 20:55 +0100, Florian wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > > 
> > > > > Sure, here's the log: https://privatebin.florianstroeger.com/
> > ?77d
> > > > 4fd1
> > > > > 8f282d55e#K0MG3NEiH0+sZvFNo+s8F9zvm1DYTj3f6kU8OEjvtmQ=
> > > > > 
> > > > > Florian
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 7:29 PM Albert Chu <address@hidden>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > Hey Florian,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Good, so atleast the "discrete reading" workaround works
> > > > correctly
> > > > > > now.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > With IPM_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG I did not get any more
> > logs,
> > > > so I
> > > > > > did
> > > > > > > it with IPMI_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG_IPMI_PACKETS.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Could you set both of these with the or operator and re-
> > run,
> > > > i.e 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > unsigned int ipmimonitoring_init_flags =
> > > > IPM_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG
> > > > > > |
> > > > > > IPMI_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG_IPMI_PACKETS
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Al
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > On Tue, 2018-12-11 at 08:52 +0100, Florian wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > > > > > > From: Florian <address@hidden>
> > > > > > > Date: Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 8:52 AM
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Freeipmi-devel] ipmimonitoring-sensors.c
> > > > > > > discretereading workaround
> > > > > > > To: Albert Chu <address@hidden>
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Hey Al,
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Thanks for the fast patch,
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > We got at least a partial victory:
> > > > > > > After setting discrete_reading to 1, I got two of the PSU
> > > > sensors
> > > > > > > working: 
> > > > > > > 8, Power Supply 1, 8, Power Supply, Nominal, 45.00, W,
> > 6Fh,
> > > > 1h,
> > > > > > > 'Presence detected'
> > > > > > > 9, Power Supply 2, 9, Power Supply, Nominal, 40.00, W,
> > 6Fh,
> > > > 1h,
> > > > > > > 'Presence detected'
> > > > > > > Unfortunately sensor 5 (total power meter)  doesn't show
> > up. 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > After setting record_ids[] to {5, 0}  and
> > record_ids_length =
> > > > 1,
> > > > > > I
> > > > > > > only get the headers:
> > > > > > > Record ID, Sensor Name, Sensor Number, Sensor Type,
> > Sensor
> > > > State,
> > > > > > > Sensor Reading, Sensor Units, Sensor Event/Reading Type
> > Code,
> > > > > > Sensor
> > > > > > > Event Bitmask, Sensor Event String
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Before your patch it looked like this:
> > > > > > > Record ID, Sensor Name, Sensor Number, Sensor Type,
> > Sensor
> > > > State,
> > > > > > > Sensor Reading, Sensor Units, Sensor Event/Reading Type
> > Code,
> > > > > > Sensor
> > > > > > > Event Bitmask, Sensor Event String
> > > > > > > 5, Power Meter, 5, Current, N/A, N/A, N/A, 9h, 2h,
> > 'Device
> > > > > > Enabled'.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > With IPM_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG I did not get any more
> > logs,
> > > > so I
> > > > > > did
> > > > > > > it with IPMI_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG_IPMI_PACKETS.
> > > > > > > I've pasted the logs for that to my privatebin again:
> > https:/
> > > > /pri
> > > > > > vate
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > bin.florianstroeger.com/?29b500374675145d#dqIOvHjjtK0FbooesKFeC5Ow2
> > > > > > fl
> > > > > > > dIWSyuWIRiNnzW+0= 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Florian
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 1:13 AM Al Chu <address@hidden>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hey Florian,
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > I have an experimental branch called ipmimonitoring-
> > > > discrete-
> > > > > > > > reading on
> > > > > > > > github here:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > https://github.com/chu11/freeipmi-mirror/tree/ipmimonit
> > orin
> > > > g-di
> > > > > > scre
> > > > > > > > te-r
> > > > > > > > eading
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > ./autogen.sh
> > > > > > > > ./configure
> > > > > > > > make
> > > > > > > > make install
> > > > > > > > re-compile ipmimonitoring-sensors.c and try it out
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > LMK if you need help, like getting to the right
> > branch.  If
> > > > you
> > > > > > > > can't
> > > > > > > > make install, LMK and I can show you some linker
> > tricks.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Al
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > On Wed, 2018-12-05 at 20:34 +0100, Florian wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hey Al,
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > That's awesome!
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Sure, I'm totally OK with a git repo. As long as I
> > just
> > > > need
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > do
> > > > > > > > > configure and make I can do it.
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Thanks for looking into this so fast!
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Florian 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 8:26 PM Albert Chu <address@hidden
> > .gov
> > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hey Florian,
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > Ok, I think I found a bug.  The "discrete reading"
> > flag
> > > > is
> > > > > > > > passed
> > > > > > > > > > to an
> > > > > > > > > > underlying library correctly, but the result is not
> > > > stored
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > libipmimonitoring correctly.  I don't remember how
> > this
> > > > > > > > workaround
> > > > > > > > > > works 100%, because I never had this motherboard.
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > Once I look into this, how would like to be able to
> > > > test? 
> > > > > > Will
> > > > > > > > > > pointing you to a github repo be ok?
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > For my personal notes for later: see 
> > > > > > > > > > _digital_sensor_reading() and
> > > > _specific_sensor_reading(),
> > > > > > store
> > > > > > > > > > sensor
> > > > > > > > > > reading result and possibly units and other things
> > too.
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > Al
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2018-12-05 at 10:59 +0100, Florian wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hey Albert,
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > The changeing of record_ids and record_ids_length
> > > > showed
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > sensor 5
> > > > > > > > > > > (but no data) like this
> > > > > > > > > > > Record ID, Sensor Name, Sensor Number, Sensor
> > Type,
> > > > > > Sensor
> > > > > > > > State,
> > > > > > > > > > > Sensor Reading, Sensor Units, Sensor
> > Event/Reading
> > > > Type
> > > > > > Code,
> > > > > > > > > > Sensor
> > > > > > > > > > > Event Bitmask, Sensor Event String
> > > > > > > > > > > 5, Power Meter, 5, Current, N/A, N/A, N/A, 9h,
> > 2h,
> > > > > > 'Device
> > > > > > > > > > Enabled'.
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > IPMI_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG unfortunately did not
> > add
> > > > ANY
> > > > > > > > more
> > > > > > > > > > logs
> > > > > > > > > > > at all, so I tried with
> > > > > > > > IPMI_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG_IPMI_PACKETS
> > > > > > > > > > > which gave me more logs.
> > > > > > > > > > > Those are quite a lot of more lines, so I pasted
> > it
> > > > into
> > > > > > my
> > > > > > > > > > > privatebin: https://privatebin.florianstroeger.co
> > m/?5
> > > > 8387
> > > > > > 298f
> > > > > > > > 9b91
> > > > > > > > > > 3c4#
> > > > > > > > > > > CkDCOMP5eFXOs6Whn+giWtidWNhMZGrkhc3tXYPaK9o=
> > > > > > > > > > > I also tried setting discrete_reading to 1 as the
> > > > sensor
> > > > > > 5
> > > > > > > > was
> > > > > > > > > > > visible with record_ids, but that did output the
> > same
> > > > > > > > results.
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > Florian
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 12:07 AM Albert Chu <chu11
> > @lln
> > > > l.go
> > > > > > v>
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Florian,
> > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > Lets try:
> > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > unsigned int record_ids[] = {5,
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > 0};                                                                
> > > > > > > > > > > >                                       
> > > > > > > > > > > > unsigned int record_ids_length = 1;
> > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > unsigned int ipmimonitoring_init_flags =
> > > > > > > > > > > > IPMI_MONITORING_FLAGS_DEBUG;
> > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > Al
> > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2018-12-04 at 20:16 +0100, Florian
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Oops, I'm sorry, Android-Mail apparently
> > deleted
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > CC...
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I compiled with ipmimonitoring_init_flags = 1
> > now
> > > > and
> > > > > > got
> > > > > > > > > > debug
> > > > > > > > > > > > stuff
> > > > > > > > > > > > > this time.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > The output is following...
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ipmi_monitoring_get_sensor_reading, 1061):
> > > > > > record_type
> > > > > > > > '0xC0'
> > > > > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > > > > > supported
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > > > > > _get_sensor_bitmask_type,
> > > > > > > > > > > > 752):
> > > > > > > > > > > > > event_reading_type_code '0x70' bitmask is OEM
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > > > > > _get_sensor_bitmask_type,
> > > > > > > > > > > > 752):
> > > > > > > > > > > > > event_reading_type_code '0x71' bitmask is OEM
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > > > > > _get_sensor_bitmask_type,
> > > > > > > > > > > > 752):
> > > > > > > > > > > > > event_reading_type_code '0x71' bitmask is OEM
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ipmi_monitoring_get_sensor_reading, 1061):
> > > > > > record_type
> > > > > > > > '0x8'
> > > > > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > > > > > supported
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ipmi_monitoring_get_sensor_reading, 1061):
> > > > > > record_type
> > > > > > > > '0x8'
> > > > > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > > > > > supported
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > > > _get_sensor_reading,
> > > > > > > > 356):
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ipmi_sensor_read: sensor reading unavailable
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > > > > > _threshold_sensor_reading,
> > > > > > > > > > > > 571):
> > > > > > > > > > > > > cannot read sensor for record id '23'
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > > > _get_sensor_reading,
> > > > > > > > 356):
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ipmi_sensor_read: sensor reading unavailable
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > > > > > _threshold_sensor_reading,
> > > > > > > > > > > > 571):
> > > > > > > > > > > > > cannot read sensor for record id '24'
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > > > _get_sensor_reading,
> > > > > > > > 356):
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ipmi_sensor_read: sensor reading unavailable
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > > > > > _threshold_sensor_reading,
> > > > > > > > > > > > 571):
> > > > > > > > > > > > > cannot read sensor for record id '38'
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > > > _get_sensor_reading,
> > > > > > > > 356):
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ipmi_sensor_read: sensor reading unavailable
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > > > > > _threshold_sensor_reading,
> > > > > > > > > > > > 571):
> > > > > > > > > > > > > cannot read sensor for record id '39'
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > > > _get_sensor_reading,
> > > > > > > > 356):
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ipmi_sensor_read: sensor reading unavailable
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > > > > > _threshold_sensor_reading,
> > > > > > > > > > > > 571):
> > > > > > > > > > > > > cannot read sensor for record id '40'
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > > > _get_sensor_reading,
> > > > > > > > 356):
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ipmi_sensor_read: sensor reading unavailable
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (ipmi_monitoring_sensor_reading.c,
> > > > > > > > _threshold_sensor_reading,
> > > > > > > > > > > > 571):
> > > > > > > > > > > > > cannot read sensor for record id '41'
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Record ID, Sensor Name, Sensor Number, Sensor
> > > > Type,
> > > > > > > > Sensor
> > > > > > > > > > State,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Sensor Reading, Sensor Units, Sensor
> > > > Event/Reading
> > > > > > Type
> > > > > > > > Code,
> > > > > > > > > > > > Sensor
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Event Bitmask, Sensor Event String
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > ipmi_monitoring_sensor_read_sensor_bitmask_strings:
> > > > > > > > success
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm unfortunately don't know much about C.
> > You
> > > > mean I
> > > > > > > > should
> > > > > > > > > > > > change
> > > > > > > > > > > > > in 'unsigned int record_ids[] = {0};' the 0
> > to a
> > > > > > sensor-
> > > > > > > > id,
> > > > > > > > > > > > right?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Because I did this and that neither worked
> > with
> > > > > > putting 5
> > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > power meter nor with any other sensor.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Florian
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 7:47 PM Albert Chu
> > <chu11@
> > > > llnl
> > > > > > .gov
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Didn't see your output, I guess you forgot
> > to
> > > > paste
> > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > in.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hmmmm.  That means the main monitoring code
> > is
> > > > just
> > > > > > > > > > returning
> > > > > > > > > > > > "0",
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > i.e.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0 sensors read.  Could you try
> > experimenting
> > > > with
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > settings
> > > > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > setting "record_ids" to the record we're
> > trying
> > > > to
> > > > > > > > figure
> > > > > > > > > > out
> > > > > > > > > > > > (i
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > think
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > it was #5 in your prior post).  Lets just
> > > > > > concentrate
> > > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > specific
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > record and try to figure out what's going
> > on. 
> > > > Also
> > > > > > set
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ipmimonitoring_init_flags for more
> > debugging
> > > > and
> > > > > > lets
> > > > > > > > see
> > > > > > > > > > what
> > > > > > > > > > > > gets
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > output.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > BTW, could you please respond to the
> > mailing
> > > > list.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Al
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2018-12-04 at 07:50 +0100, Florian
> > > > Ströger
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello Albert, 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the fast reply!
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've set 'int
> > > > ignore_non_interpretable_sensors'
> > > > > > to 0,
> > > > > > > > but
> > > > > > > > > > > > when I
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > run
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the binary now it just outputs the
> > headers,
> > > > like
> > > > > > > > this:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >                                                
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Albert Chu
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > address@hidden
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Computer Scientist
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > High Performance Systems Division
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > -- 
> > > > > > > > > > > > Albert Chu
> > > > > > > > > > > > address@hidden
> > > > > > > > > > > > Computer Scientist
> > > > > > > > > > > > High Performance Systems Division
> > > > > > > > > > > > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
> > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > -- 
> > > > > > > > > > Albert Chu
> > > > > > > > > > address@hidden
> > > > > > > > > > Computer Scientist
> > > > > > > > > > High Performance Systems Division
> > > > > > > > > > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > -- 
> > > > > > > Florian Ströger
> > > > > > > Zur Rossschwemme 5
> > > > > > > 3452 Atzenbrugg
> > > > > > > ****************************
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Freeipmi-devel mailing list
> > > > > > > address@hidden
> > > > > > > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freeipmi-devel
> > > > > > -- 
> > > > > > Albert Chu
> > > > > > address@hidden
> > > > > > Computer Scientist
> > > > > > High Performance Systems Division
> > > > > > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > -- 
> > > > Albert Chu
> > > > address@hidden
> > > > Computer Scientist
> > > > High Performance Systems Division
> > > > Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> >
--
Albert Chu
address@hidden
Computer Scientist
High Performance Systems Division
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]