Re: [Freeipmi-devel] Supermicro X8DTL-3F CPU1 Temp, CPU2 Temp, PS Status sensors query issues

[Albert Chu]

Hey Werner,

On Thu, 2011-01-27 at 00:54 -0800, Werner Fischer wrote:
> Hi Al,
> 
> On Die, 2011-01-25 at 09:00 +0100, Werner Fischer wrote:
> > Hi Al,
> > 
> > > I got a beta release up with a new option to ipmi-sensors called
> > > --ignore-unrecognized-events.  Appears to work for me in a test case,
> > > can you LMK if it works for you.
> > > http://download.gluster.com/pub/freeipmi/qa-release/freeipmi-1.0.2.beta0.tar.gz
> > Thanks! I'll be in the test lab again tomorrow, I will test it and let
> > you know.
> the option works like a charm ;-) - thank you very much!

Great!

> address@hidden:~$ ipmi-sensors -h 10.1.102.201 -u monitoring -p relation -l 
> user --interpret-oem-data --output-sensor-state --ignore-unrecognized-events
> ID   | Name          | Type              | State    | Reading    | Units | 
> Event
> 4    | FAN 1         | Fan               | Nominal  | 9216.00    | RPM   | 
> 'OK'
> [...]
> 1210 | VBAT          | Voltage           | Nominal  | 3.05       | V     | 
> 'OK'
> 1277 | CPU1 Temp     | OEM Reserved      | N/A      | N/A        | N/A   | 
> 'OEM Event = 0000h'
> 1344 | CPU2 Temp     | OEM Reserved      | N/A      | N/A        | N/A   | 
> 'OEM Event = 0000h'
> 1411 | System Temp   | Temperature       | Nominal  | 30.00      | C     | 
> 'OK'
> [...]
> 1880 | Chassis Intru | Physical Security | Nominal  | N/A        | N/A   | 
> 'OK'
> 1947 | PS Status     | Power Supply      | Nominal  | N/A        | N/A   | 
> 'Presence detected'
> address@hidden:~$
> 
> > > > > when querying a Supermicro X8DTL-3F mainboard (Hardware Revision 2.01,
> > > > > IPMI Firmware Rev. 2.02) I have found two issues:
> > > > >      1. the 'CPU1 Temp' and 'CPU2 Temp' OEM sensors cannot currently 
> > > > > be
> > > > >         interpreted
> > > > I would bet these sensors are identical to other Supermicro boards I've
> > > > supported.  What is the product id of your board?  You can see it with
> > > > bmc-info.  I can add it to the list and that should get the
> > > > interpretation working correctly [1]
> > I will send you the product id tomorrow from the lab.
> Here is the output of this system (X8DTL-3F)
> address@hidden:~$ bmc-info -h 10.1.102.201 -u ADMIN -p **** -l admin
> Device ID             : 32
> Device Revision       : 1
> Device SDRs           : unsupported
> Firmware Revision     : 2.02
> Device Available      : yes (normal operation)
> IPMI Version          : 2.0
> Sensor Device         : supported
> SDR Repository Device : supported
> SEL Device            : supported
> FRU Inventory Device  : supported
> IPMB Event Receiver   : supported
> IPMB Event Generator  : supported
> Bridge                : unsupported
> Chassis Device        : supported
> Manufacturer ID       : Super Micro Computer Inc. (47488)
> Product ID            : 6

Cool, I'll add it in.

> GUID : 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
> 
> ipmi_cmd_get_system_info_parameters_system_firmware_version_first_set: 
> privilege level insufficient
> address@hidden:~$ 
> 
> Do you have an idea why there is this "privilege level insufficient"
> message although I use priviledge level admin?

I'm going to assume a bug on their motherboard.  The
get_system_info_parameters() is optional in the IPMI spec.  Perhaps they
are returning an improper error code (bmc-info handles the "invalid
command" error code and moves on appropriately), or perhaps their
authentication is messed up.  If you can send me a --debug output, I can
figure it out.

> 
> PS: I haven't used bmc-info so far. Seems also very interesting, so I tried 
> it with two other systems:
> 
> 1. Supermicro X8DT3-F - here I get more detailed information:
> address@hidden:~$ bmc-info -h 10.1.102.10 -u ADMIN -p **** -l admin
> Device ID             : 32
> Device Revision       : 1
> Device SDRs           : unsupported
> Firmware Revision     : 1.32
> Device Available      : yes (normal operation)
> IPMI Version          : 2.0
> Sensor Device         : supported
> SDR Repository Device : supported
> SEL Device            : supported
> FRU Inventory Device  : supported
> IPMB Event Receiver   : supported
> IPMB Event Generator  : supported
> Bridge                : unsupported
> Chassis Device        : supported
> Manufacturer ID       : Super Micro Computer Inc. (47488)
> Product ID            : 43707
> Auxiliary Firmware Revision Information : 00000001h
> 
> GUID : 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000434D53
> 
> System Firmware Version       : rsion1.0
> System Name                   : tk-esx1
> Primary Operating System Name : SE Server 1.0
> Operating System Name         : VMware ESXi 4.1.0 build-260247
> 
> Channel Information
> 
> Channel Number       : 0
> Medium Type          : IPMB (I2C)
> Protocol Type        : IPMB-1.0
> Active Session Count : 0
> Session Support      : session-less
> Vendor ID            : Intelligent Platform Management Interface forum (7154)
> 
> Channel Number       : 1
> Medium Type          : 802.3 LAN
> Protocol Type        : IPMB-1.0
> Active Session Count : 1
> Session Support      : multi-session
> Vendor ID            : Intelligent Platform Management Interface forum (7154)
> address@hidden:~$ 
> 
> 
> 2. Intel SR2500 - here I get an error at the end, too:
> address@hidden:~$ bmc-info -h 192.168.1.211 -u admin -p **** -l admin
> Device ID             : 32
> Device Revision       : 1
> Device SDRs           : unsupported
> Firmware Revision     : 0.64
> Device Available      : yes (normal operation)
> IPMI Version          : 2.0
> Sensor Device         : supported
> SDR Repository Device : supported
> SEL Device            : supported
> FRU Inventory Device  : supported
> IPMB Event Receiver   : supported
> IPMB Event Generator  : unsupported
> Bridge                : unsupported
> Chassis Device        : supported
> Manufacturer ID       : Intel Corporation (343)
> Product ID            : 40
> Auxiliary Firmware Revision Information : 03004200h
> 
> ipmi_cmd_get_device_guid: bad completion code

Ahhhh, the get_device_guid command is actually optional.  I've never
seen a motherboard that didn't implement it.  Let me put a fix to get
around this.  (I'm going to guess they return an "invalid command" error
code, but if you can send me a --debug output, I'll know for sure.)

Thanks,

Al

> address@hidden:~$ 
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Werner
> 
-- 
Albert Chu
address@hidden
Computer Scientist
High Performance Systems Division
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory