freeipmi-users
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Freeipmi-users] Intel SR 1625 Sensors


From: Albert Chu
Subject: Re: [Freeipmi-users] Intel SR 1625 Sensors
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 10:30:04 -0700

Hey Werner,

On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 10:15 -0700, Albert Chu wrote:
> Hi Werner,
> 
> On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 03:51 -0700, Werner Fischer wrote:
> > Hi Al,
> > (sorry for sending it twice, I sent my first email in error only to you, 
> > not the list)
> > 
> > I've been on vacation for some weeks and now back again.
> > 
> > Benjamin meant with "not detected" that FreeIPMI returns a monitoring
> > status of "N/A" for those sensors (not "Nominal"). Unfortunately we
> > missed to send the output of "ipmimonitoring --legacy-output
> > --interpret-oem-data --quiet-cache --sdr-cache-recreate" (which is used
> > by our Nagios plugin):
> > 
> > Record ID | Sensor Name | Sensor Group | Monitoring Status | Sensor Units | 
> > Sensor Reading [...]
> > 47 | SMI Timeout | OEM Reserved | N/A | N/A | 'OK'
> > [...]
> > 55 | P1 VRD Hot | Temperature | N/A | N/A | 'OK'
> > 56 | P2 VRD Hot | Temperature | N/A | N/A | 'OK'
> > [...]
> > 59 | IOH Therm Trip | Temperature | N/A | N/A | 'OK'
> > 
> > Would it be possible for you to include information about those four
> > sensors to future versions of FreeIPMI, so that it reports a monitoring
> > status of "Nominal" when the sensor reading is 'OK' as above?
> 
> Shouldn't be a problem.  B/c the SMI Timeout one is an OEM sensor, I
> would need information from Intel on that one.

Actually, I would need info on Intel for one other sensor, #59.  The
discrete states for that sensor are "asserted" and "deasserted".
Naturally, these states are completely ambiguous.  I can go ahead and
add support into FreeIPMI for it, but the defaults I will have to
completely guess on.  Users might need to adjust the config file for
their environment later on. [1]

The other two temp sensors are "limit exceeded" vs "limit not exceeded",
so they are more clear.

Al

[1] - Unfortunately, this can't be avoid.  One vendor's "asserted" could
mean critical, while another vendor's "asserted" could be nominal.

> The other three I can figure out from the previous e-mail.  Let me see
> what I can get for you to try out.
> 
> Al
> 
> > In case you would need additional information from Intel about those
> > sensors, just let me know.
> > 
> > Best regards and have a nice weekend,
> > thank you,
> > Werner
> > 
> > On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 10:06 -0800, Albert Chu wrote:
> > > Hi Benjamin,
> > > 
> > > What do you mean by "not detected"?  It appears everything is fine by
> > > the information you list below.
> > > 
> > > Do you mean these sensors are not reporting actual temperatures?  While
> > > these are indeed temperature sensors (identified by the motherboard as
> > > such), they do not appear to be sensors that report a temperature
> > > reading.  They instead report an event bitmask.  The key is the
> > > "event/Readin Type Code" field of each sensor.
> > > 
> > > Al
> > > 
> > > On Tue, 2011-02-22 at 23:55 -0800, Benjamin Bayer wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > > we have a Intel SR1625 wehre some Sensors not detected with FreeIPMI 
> > > > Version 1.0.2.beta3.
> > > >  
> > > > Thank You.
> > > > 
> > > > Regards
> > > > 
> > > > Benjamin Bayer
> > 
-- 
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]